Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7446 (JHR)

VINOD GOSWAMI ALIAS VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3188/2026 · 2026-04-30

Rajesh Shankar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:12796 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3188 of 2026 ----- 1. Vinod Goswami @ Vinod Kumar Goswami, S/o Gopal Goswami, R/o Village-Balidih, Goswami Tola, P.O. & P.S.- Jaridih, District-Bokaro 2. Fuleshwar Marandi, S/o Ram Manjhi, R/o Village-Bachas, Tola-Dourabera, P.O. & P.S.-Jaridih, District-Bokaro .......... Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand .......... Opp. Party ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P. ----- Order No.03 Date: 30.04.2026 1. The petitioners are accused in the case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 271, 272, 274, 275 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 47a & 55 of the Jharkhand Excise Act, 2015. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner No. 1 is the driver and the petitioner No. 2 is the cleaner of the pickup van bearing registration No. JH-01EZ-2272. It has been alleged that four pickup vans including that of the petitioners were involved in unloading of illegal liquors from a truck standing near Sugar and Spice Hotel at Jainamore. The petitioners were not at all aware of the fact that the said liquors were illegal. Though two more criminal cases are pending against the petitioner No. 1, however, so far as the present case is concerned, he has been implicated in the 2026:JHHC:12796 2 same merely on suspicion. The petitioner No. 2 has no criminal antecedent. The petitioners are in judicial custody since 03.02.2026. Hence, they may be given the privilege of regular bail. 3. Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for regular bail. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No. 13 of 2026. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 30.04.2026 Vikas/ Uploaded on 01.05.2026