Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23630 (JHR)

ROHAN DAS v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./2484/2026 · 2026-08-18

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:24878 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.2484 of 2026 ------ Rohan Das, son of Bimal Das aged about 28 years, resident of Daiguttu, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. and P.S.-Mango, Town Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 18-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No.434 of 2025 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No.43 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 325, 326, 379, 307 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 27 of Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons attempted to murder Shankar Singh, causing injuries to him and the co-accused Vikash Tiwari made 3-4 firings and snatched away the gold chain and also attempted to murder Anil Sao who is a friend of Shankar Singh. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that no any witness has been examined as yet. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is also submitted that the co-accused has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 16.09.2025 in B.A. No.7970 of 2025. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.06.2025 as has been mentioned in para-01 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Jamshedpur in connection with S.T. Case No.434 of 2025 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No.43 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 18/08/2026 Abhiraj/