Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9155/2026 of MD. FARAZ KHAN @ FARAZ KHAN Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 30 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9155 of 2026 ------ Md. Faraz Khan @ Faraz Khan, aged about 24 years, son of Anwar Kalam Khan, resident of H. No. 1, Road No. 16, Old Puruliya Road, P.O.+P.S. –Azad Nagar (Mango), Town – Jamshedpur, District –East
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:29489 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9155 of 2026
------ Md. Faraz Khan @ Faraz Khan, aged about 24 years, son of Anwar Kalam Khan, resident of H. No. 1, Road No. 16, Old Puruliya Road, P.O.+P.S. –Azad Nagar (Mango), Town – Jamshedpur, District –East Singhbhum.
… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitenra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Someshwar Roy, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 30.09.2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No.45 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 111 of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 25(6), 25(1-B)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner supplied two magazines and four live cartridges to the co-accused - Sayed Adnan Mirza which was recovered from the co-accused. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.07.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 09 of the bail application. It is then submitted that except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no material in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is next submitted that there is no recovery from the petitioner. It is further 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. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused person has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 14.08.2026 in B.A. No. 7670 of 2026. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.
The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No.45 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an 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.)
30.09.2026
Sonu/