Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9164/2026 of NASRULLAH ANSARI @ RAZA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 30 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.9164 of 2026 ------ Nasrullah Ansari @ Raza, aged about 33 years, S/o- Roj Mohammad Miyan, Resident of Vill.- Babhandih, P.O.- Nawadih & P.S.- Ramgarh, District- Palamau, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... ....
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:29403] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.9164 of 2026
------ Nasrullah Ansari @ Raza, aged about 33 years, S/o- Roj Mohammad Miyan, Resident of Vill.- Babhandih, P.O.- Nawadih & P.S.- Ramgarh, District- Palamau, Jharkhand
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Karan Kaushik, Advocate
Ms. Kanu Priya, Advocate
For the State
: Ms. Mohua Palit, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated-30-09-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No.48 of 2026 (G.R. Case No.510 of 2026) registered for the offences punishable under Section 310(2), 111(2)
(b) , 111(4) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 25(1-B)(a), 25(1A), 35, 27(1) of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in commission of dacoity and looted Rs.1,00,000/- and gold and silver jewelries from a jewelry shop. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that though the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. yet without putting him on Test Identification Parade as has been mentioned in paragraph-11 of the instant bail application, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner yet no witness has been examined. It is also submitted that the co-accused, with similar allegations, has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 21.08.2026 passed in B.A. No.7898 of 2026. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and 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 petitioner has been in custody since 23.04.2026 as has been mentioned in para- 18 of the instant bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 S.D.J.M, Ramgarh in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No.48 of 2026 (G.R. Case No.510 of 2026) with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case, furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-30.09.2026-Animesh/