2026:JHHC:7105 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11931 of 2025 Barka Marandi, aged about 35 years, S/o Late Belu Marandi, Resident of Village-Chandopani, P.O.- Chandopani, P.S.- Digghi, O.P. Dumka (M), District-Dumka, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Ms. Lily Sahay, Advocate --- 04/16.03.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.09.2025 in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 389 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 309 (6), 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-3rd, Godda. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and his name has come in the confessional statement of the co-accused. He has also submitted that the petitioner has not been put in TIP and there has been no recovery from the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has referred to the case diary and submitted that there is recovery of arms from the co-accused as mentioned in paragraph 55 of the case diary. She has also submitted that so far as the other co-accused person who has been enlarged on bail, he has one criminal antecedent and the petitioner has as many as 6 criminal antecedent. 2026:JHHC:7105 2 5. To which, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a few cases were registered after the present case. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R nor has been put on TIP nor there is any recovery from the petitioner and apparently except confessional statement, nothing could be pointed out by the side of the State and one co-accused has been enlarged on bail, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge 3rd, Godda in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 389 of 2025 on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 7. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 8. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 16.03.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-17.03.2026