( 2026:JHHC:26831 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8122 of 2026 ------ Bablu Mahto @ Bablu Kumar, aged about 34 years, S/o Late Degnarayan Mahto, R/o Village-Belmo, P.O.-Poraiya, P.S.- Nimiaghat, District-Giridih. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 07-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No.90 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 270 & 271 of the BNS, 2023 and under Section 47(a), 47(f), 52 & 55 of Excise Act. This is the third journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail, earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected twice vide order dated 05.02.2026 in B.A. No.11890 of 2025 and order dated 13.05.2026 in B.A. No.4050 of 2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that 41,400 litres of spirit was recovered from open godown and 200 litres of spirit suspected to be liquor was recovered from a Scorpio vehicle parked near the hotel of the petitioner and the same were seized. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, 04 witnesses have been examined out of whom, PW-01 has turned hostile and has not supported the case of the prosecution, PW- 02 and PW-04 are the police witnesses and PW-03 in his cross- examination stated that he has never gone to the place of occurrence hotel. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-22 of this 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 informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.09.2025 as has been mentioned in para-22 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 JMFC, Giridih in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No.90 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 informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 07/09/2026 Abhiraj/