[2026:JHHC:22162] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3156 of 2026 ------ Shamshad Ansari, aged about 36 years, son of Rafik Miyan, resident of vill. – Kelhwa, P.O. – Ambabar, P.S.- Panki, Dist. – Palamau, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Karan Kaushik, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-27-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No. 243 of 2022 arising out of Panki P.S. Case No. 145 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 656 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364A, 302, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 35 of the Arms Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.01.2023 passed in B.A. No. 13935 of 2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are two Shamsad Ansari as accused persons. It is next submitted that the first Shamsad Ansari is son of Sadique Ansari @ Sadique Miyan and he is the first accused persons of the first charge sheet submitted in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner is also Shamsad Ansari but he is the son of Rafik Miyan and his name has been implicated in this case only on the basis of supplementary charge sheet. It is also submitted that other Shamsad Ansari has since been acquitted by the trial court vide the judgment dated 04th December, 2024 passed in S.T. Case No. 217 of 2021 and there is no confessional statement given by the petitioner nor the petitioner is any way associated with any poultry stall and the name of Shamsad Ansari as has come on record during the trial through the witnesses, who have been examined as PW-1 and PW-3, is regarding the other Shamsad Ansari son of Sadique Ansari @ Sadique Miyan. It is further submitted that six witnesses have been examined in this case but none has stated anything against the petitioner – Shamsad Ansari son of Rafik Miyan. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.03.2022 as mentioned in para-24 of the instant bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-25 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 Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with S.T. Case No. 243 of 2022 arising out of Panki P.S. Case No. 145 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 656 of 2021 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.) Dated:- 27.07.2026 Saroj/