2026:JHHC:9953 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1749 of 2026 Neeraj Kumar Nayak, S/o: Baleshwar Prasad Nayak … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, Advocate --- 03/08.04.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 28.12.2025 in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 237 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of the BNS, 2023 pending in the court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is running a motor cycle showroom and he had received Rs.50,000/- for the purpose of booking a motor cycle and there is no recovery from the possession of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that firstly, the confessional statement of Rohit Mehra was recorded and on his confessional statement the name of the petitioner transpired and thereafter, the confessional statement of petitioner was recorded and then on the basis of the confessional statement of the petitioner, Sanjay Verma was apprehended and his confessional statement has also recorded from whom there is recovery of stolen article from the possession of Sanjay Verma which has been identified in TIP. Learned 2026:JHHC:9953 2 counsel submits that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents of similar nature. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the stolen article has been recovered from Sanjay Verma on the basis of confessional statement of petitioner and the fact that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. This bail application is accordingly rejected. 7. Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 08.04.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-09.04.2026