Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9242/2026 of MD. NAJIM Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.9242 of 2026 ------ Md. Najim, age about 31 years, Son of Hakimuddin, Resident of Village- Pahadi Mohalla, P.O. & P.S.- Daltonganj, District- Palamau .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
[2026:JHHC:29676] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.9242 of 2026
------ Md. Najim, age about 31 years, Son of Hakimuddin, Resident of Village- Pahadi Mohalla, P.O. & P.S.- Daltonganj, District- Palamau
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. No.2, Advocate
For the State
: Ms. Kumari Rashmi, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated-05-10-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No.553 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.818 of 2026 (S.T. Case No.341 of 2026) registered under Section 308(3), 308(4), 111(2)(b) of the B.N.S., 2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in the organized crime of demanding extortion of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from the informant who is an owner of gold shop and the cut of the petitioner was 20% of the extortion amount received and the petitioner had done reiki of the house and shop of the informant by using his car and Pulsar Motorcycle and made video clip thereof and sent it to the co-accused Prince Khan who is the leader of the Gang and received Rs.24,000/- in his account from the co-accused Prince Khan for purchasing arms and ammunitions and the petitioner and the co-accused Murtaza Ansari went near the shop of the informant being armed with two country-made pistols and live cartridges but could not make firing because there was rush in the shop. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that though charge-sheet has already been submitted but no witness has been examined as yet. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 25.12.2025. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of being involved in organized crime of demanding extortion as well as his criminal antecedent, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail.
Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, his criminal antecedent as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-05.10.2026-Animesh/