Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6506 (JHR)

KAJU VERMA @ KAJU KUMAR VERMA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./2975/2026 · 2026-04-17

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:11177 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2975 of 2026 ------ 1. Kaju Verma @ Kaju Kumar Verma, aged about 36 years, S/o Tunu Ram, R/o –Village –Kunda, P.O.+P.S. –Kunda, District –Chatra, Jharkhand. 2. Lalender Ravidas @ Lalender Das, aged about 37 years, S/o Late Rajdeo Das, R/o Village –Baudhadih, P.O.+P.S. – Kunda, District –Chatra, Jharkhand. 3. Vijay Yadav @ Bijay Yadav, aged about 37 years, S/o Late Ramesh Yadav, R/o –Village –Baudhadih, P.O.+P.S. – Kunda, District –Chatra, Jharkhand. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Binod Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Spl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 17.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Pratappur P.S. Case No.08 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(5), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have committed theft of timber from the protected forest area by carrying the same in a pick-up vehicle. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –13 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 21.01.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 04 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 informant or 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 Spl. 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 S.D.J.M., Chatra, in connection with Pratappur P.S. Case No.08 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 informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 17.04.2026 Sonu/