Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9034 (JHR)

RAJU GORAI ALIAS RAJEEV GORAI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./2156/2026 · 2026-03-18

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:7467 1 | P a g e IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.2156 of 2026 Raju Gorai @ Rajeev Gorai, aged about 19 years, S/o. Shib Shankar Gorai, R/o. Champai Nagar Majhi Tola, Adityapur, P.O. & P.S.- Adityapur, Dist.- Seraikella- Kharsawan, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Adv. For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P. Order No.02/Dated- 18.03.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP. 2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No. 275 of 2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 324(4), 125(a), 125(b), 352, 351(2) & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, which is pending in the Court of learned C.J.M, Seraikella. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation of assault against all the accused persons. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 05.09.2025. It is also submitted that several co-accused persons namely Anish Kumar Deep @ Anish Deep, Pawan Oraon , Naveen Kumar Singh have been granted bail by different co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026, 13.03.2026 and 11.03.2026 passed in B.A. No. 186 of 2026, B.A. No. 114 of 2026 2026:JHHC:7467 2 | P a g e and B.A. No. 11732 of 2025 respectively and the case of the petitioner stands on better footing. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case and abides by all terms and conditions which may be imposed. Hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. 4. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but has fairly admitted the other co-accused persons have been granted bail and the case of the petitioner stands on better footing. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find substance in the contentions raised on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M, Seraikella in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No. 275 of 2025 with condition that petitioner shall appear physically on each and every date during the trial of case till its conclusion unless his physical appearance is dispensed with for sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and with further condition that petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 18.03.2026 Rahul Uploaded on 19.03.2026