B.A./9222/2026 of MAHABIR ORAON Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 1 October 2026

( 2026:JHHC:29530 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 9222 of 2026

------ Mahabir Oraon, aged about 52 years, s/o Madi Oraon, r/o Village-Aloundi, P.O.-Tarosiladon, P.S.-Khunti, Dist.-Khunti

… Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Ms. Neha Kumari, Advocate For the State

: Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 01.10.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No.231 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 338/336(3)/319(2)/318(4) of the B.N.S., 2023.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed forgery and cheating by obtaining loan in the name of co-villagers. It is next submitted that in the FIR, it has categorically been mentioned that the petitioner is only an agent of the company concerned namely Samunnati Finance Limited and it is all the employees of the said company who in June, 2024 collected Aadhar Card, Pan Card and three blank cheques with signature of the informant and other victims and also captured their pictures and such employees of the said company intimated the informant and other victims that they have become members of the said company. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and there is no allegation against the petitioner of inducing anyone to part with any property and in the absence of the same, the offence punishable under Section 318 (4) of the B.N.S., 2023 is not made out. It is then submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of himself creating any forged document hence, the offence of forgery is also not made out against the petitioner. It is also submitted that though charge sheet has been submitted in this case but no witness has been examined as yet. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Khunti, in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No.231 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

01.10.2026 Gunjan-