MD. HARUN @ HARUN ANSARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./7571/2026 · 2026-08-13
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23739 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23739 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:24166 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 7571 of 2026
------ Md. Harun @ Harun Ansari, aged about 41 years, son of Rasid Ansari, resident of Pokhariya, Koridih, P.O. & P.S.- Narayanpur, Dist.-Jamtara, Jharkhand
… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State
: Mr. V.S. Sahay, Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.02 Dated- 13.08.2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Ahilyapur P.S. Case No.31 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 140(1)/61(2) of the B.N.S.,
2023.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner abducted Mukesh Kumar Mandal and looted his motorcycle. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that though the petitioner is not named in the FIR but without putting him on Test Identification Parade as has been mentioned in para -11 of the bail application, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.02.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 18 of the bail application. 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused person with similar allegation has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide
order dated 30.06.2026 in B.A. No.3110 of 2026. 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Ahilyapur P.S. Case No.31 of 2025 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
13.08.2026 Gunjan-