Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26299 (JHR)

RAHUL MUNDA @ NANDU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./8583/2026 · 2026-09-15

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:27868 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8583 of 2026 ------ Rahul Munda @ Nandu, aged about 46 years, son of Charo Munda, resident of Village –Padampur, P.O. –Lodhama, P.S. –Karra, District –Khunti, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 15.09.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Karra P.S. Case No.39 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 238, 61(2) & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 25(1-B)(a)/26/35 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was instrumental in the co-accused –Ramesh Tirkey @ Ravi Tiru opening firing upon Herman; who sustained fire arm injury. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the fire arm was recovered from the custody of the petitioner in connection with the said case. It is next submitted that in connection with attempt to murder of Herman Horo, Karra P.S. Case No. 37 of 2026 has been registered and this is the second F.I.R. in respect of the said occurrence only because recovery of the fire arms from the custody of the co-accused. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 26.05.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 23 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. 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 S.D.J.M., Khunti, in connection with Karra P.S. Case No.39 of 2026 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.) 15.09.2026 Sonu/