2026:JHHC:4828 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11032 of 2025 …. Md. Murshid, S/o Md. Sabir Warsi, Aged about 22 years, R/o West Chobhaga, Gulshan Colony, P.S.- Anandpur, PO- Tangra, Dist.- Kolkata, West Bengal. ……Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ……Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Aman Kr. Rahul, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, APP …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT 03/18.02.2026 Heard Mr. Aman Kr. Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, learned APP for the State. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner namely, Md. Murshid for grant of regular bail who is in custody in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No. 244 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 111(3)(4)(6)(7), 308(3)(4), 351(3), 352, 3(5) of B.N.S.S. 3. As per FIR, the Informant has received a phone call on mobile by which rangdari of Rs.5 (Five) Crore was demanded. During enquiry, it transpires that petitioner has owner of SIM Card No. 9163475471 from which threatening was given. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. It is 2026:JHHC:4828 2 submitted that no overt act is attributed against the petitioner rather the petitioner gave mobile to his brother-in-law. It is submitted that the money was not transferred and the petitioner is not member of Prince Khan gang. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.09.2025 and hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the SIM Card No. 9163475471 from which threatening was given to the Informant. It is submitted that the present petitioner namely, Md. Murshid and the co-accused namely, Niyaz Ali at Paragrpah-39 and 42 of the case diary have confessed their guilt and admitted that the petitioner is the owner of the SIM Card No. 9163475471 even Rozi Parveen and Prince Khan have also admitted the guilt in the confessional statement and hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected. 6. Perused the FIR, case diary and considered the submission of both sides. 7. It appears that this case relates to demand of rangdari of Rs. 5 (Five) crore by the Informant from the sim used by the petitioner. 8. Considering the fact and the circumstances of this case, 2026:JHHC:4828 3 this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner- Md. Murshid on bail at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner- Md. Murshid, is rejected. 10. Thus, B.A. No. 11032 of 2025, is hereby, dismissed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated: 18.02.2026 RKM/