Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24577 (JHR)

SANJAY GOSWAMI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./8076/2026 · 2026-08-31

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:26201 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8076 of 2026 ------ 1. Sanjay Goswami, aged about 31 years, son of Nirmal Goswami, resident of village –Pandani, P.O. & P.S. – Narayanpur, District –Jamtara. 2. Jamshed Ansari, aged about 26 years, son of Karim Mian, resident of village –Bhagabandh, P.O. & P.S. –Narayanpur, District –Jamtara. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Kumar Verma, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 31.08.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Jasidih (Rail) P.S. Case No.66 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 317(4)/317(5)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.2 was moving in a suspicious manner and he was apprehended by police and upon search, a stolen mobile phone was recovered from his possession and the petitioner no.1 is a friend of the petitioner no.2 who was also roaming in the premises of the Jasidih Railway Station and one stolen mobile phone was also recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and there is no F.I.R. registered in respect of the stolen mobile phones recovered from the possession of the petitioners. It is next submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 27.06.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 17 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur, in connection with Jasidih (Rail) P.S. Case No.66 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 31.08.2026 Sonu/