[2026:JHHC:9844] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.11889 of 2025 ------ Manoj Paswan S/o Rajendra Paswan aged about 52 years, Resident of Village- Marsa, P.O. & P.S. Bounsi, Dist- Banka (Bihar) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party With B.A. No.11713 of 2025 ------ Pradeep Paswan, S/o Dukhan Paswan aged about 35 years, Resident of Village- Marsa, P.O. & P.S. Bounsi, Dist- Banka (Bihar) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate Mr. Nishant Kr. Roy, Advocate [in both bail applications] For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P. [in B.A. No.11889 of 2025] Mr. V.S. Sahay, Advocate [in B.A. No.11713 of 2025] ------ Order No:-04 Dated:-07-04-2026 Heard the parties. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners files the supplementary affidavit in the respective bail applications. Keep the same in the record. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Hansdiha P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 729 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 310(2) of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners of both these bail applications is that the petitioners of both these bail applications committed dacoity and looted jewelries from the house of the informant and fled away after locking them. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is then submitted that the petitioners are not named in the FIR but without putting them under TIP, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioners. It is then submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of Pradeep Paswan but the only allegations against Manoj Paswan is that he led to recovery of the looted jewelries from the house of the co-accused Manoj Sah. It is further submitted that both of the petitioners have been in custody since 08.08.2025 as mentioned in para-13 of the respective bail applications. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertake not to 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 released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners both these bail applications. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioners are directed to be enlarged 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 the learned SDJM, Dumka in connection with Hansdiha P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 729 of 2025 with the condition that they will co- operate with the trial of the case and furnish their mobile numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards in the court below with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the trial of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 07.04.2026 Saroj/