Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18432 (JHR)

JOGON NAG ALIAS RAJA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3535/2026 · 2026-06-30

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:19110 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3535 of 2026 ------ Jogon Nag @ Raja, aged about 26 years, son of Sukhram Nag, resident of village-Rundungdih Tola, Poseya, P.O.-Bhandra, P.S.- Khunti, District-Khunti. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilendu Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Rajlakshmi Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vijoy Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 30-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Maranghada P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) of B.N.S, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed robbery and looted the bag containing cash of Rs.40,000/-. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations are false. It is next submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and though he was put on TIP, he could not be identified by the witness as mentioned in the chart of TIP annexed at page-05 of the supplementary affidavit. It is then submitted that because of village politics, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 07.11.2025 as mentioned in para-11 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co- operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Khunti in connection with Maranghada P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 30/06/2026 Abhiraj/