Jharkhand High Court
Cr.A(DB)/1427/2026 of RANJIT SAHNI ALIAS RANJIT KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 November 2026
) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1427 of 2026 Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar, S/o Shatrughan Sahni @ Satrudhan Sahni, R/o Village Satishnagar, PO-Satishnagar, PS-Saura, District- Khagaria, Bihar …… …… Appellant(s) Versus The
( 2026:JHHC:32447-DB )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1427 of 2026
Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar, S/o Shatrughan Sahni @ Satrudhan Sahni, R/o Village Satishnagar, PO-Satishnagar, PS-Saura, District- Khagaria, Bihar
……
…… Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
……
…… Respondent(s)
CORAM
: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SHARMA
------
For the Appellant(s)
: Mr. Ritesh Kr. Pathak, Advocate
For the State
: Ms. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.P.P.
Order No.02
Date: 05.11.2026
I.A. No. 15487 of 2026
Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides.
This application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning a delay of 18 days in filing the appeal.
Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in this application, the delay of 18 days, which had occurred in filing this appeal, is condoned and this I.A. is allowed and disposed of.
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1427 of 2026
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.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.08.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad in B.P. No. 636 of 2026 arising out of Dhanbad G.R.P.S. Case No. 139 of 2026, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
3. It has been alleged that the appellant and the other accused persons were involved in trafficking a minor child aged 13 years.
4. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the elder brother of the victim works at Raichur and the appellant being a relative of the victim was taking the victim to meet his elder brother with the consent of his parents. It has been submitted that the charge-sheet has already been submitted by the police and the appellant is in custody since 30.06.2026.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and has submitted that at paras-70 and 71 of the case diary, the statements of the parents of the victim reveal that they had not given any consent to the appellant to take their child to Raichur.
6. On consideration of the period of custody undergone by the appellant and the fact that the child has been recovered and the charge-sheet having been submitted, we while setting aside the order dated 20.08.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad in B.P. No. 636 of 2026 arising out of Dhanbad G.R.P.S. Case No. 139 of 2026, direct that the appellant, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Railway J.M., Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad G.R.P.S. Case No. 139 of 2026.
7. This criminal appeal is allowed.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)
(RAM SHARMA, J.) 05th November, 2026 AKT/MM Uploaded on 06/11/2026