Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7494 (JHR)

DEBU MURMU v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3568/2026 · 2026-04-29

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:12599] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3568 of 2026 ------ 1. Debu Murmu, aged about 30 years, s/o Late Jona Murmu, resident of Village Jamui, P.O. & P.S.- Kathikund, District- Dumka, Jharkhand. 2. Kiran Hembrom, aged about 19 Years, s/o- Late Ravishwar Hembrom, resident of Village- Supaidih, P.O. & P.S. – Jamtara, District- Jamtara. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-29-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Gopikandar P.S. Case No. 38 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 105 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 47(a) of the Excise Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner No.1 is the driver and the petitioner No.2 is the cleaner of the commercial vehicle which was involved in transportation of foreign liquor for selling illegally. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 15.12.2025 as is evident from para-19 of the instant bail application. It is further submitted that petitioners have no criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-17 of the bail application. 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. 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 Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dumka in connection with Gopikandar P.S. Case No. 38 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 105 of 2026 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 number 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:- 29.04.2026 Saroj/