JAGRAN LOHRA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2026-05-07. JAGRAN LOHRA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
( 2026:JHHC:13705 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2987 of 2026 ------ 1. Jagran Lohra, aged about 31 years, son of Sukhu Lohra 2. Sunil Munda, aged about 28 years, son of Jora Munda 3. Sukhu Munda, aged about 34 years, son of Late Dundha Munda All R/o village –Suwari Jaltanda, Pahan Toli, P. S. –Karra, P. O. –Karra, District –Khunti (Jhrkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Pratiyush Lala, Advocate : Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Neveen Kr. Ganjhu, Addl. P. P. ------ Order No. 04 Dated- 07. 05. 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Jariagarh P. S. Case No. 40 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 140(2) and 3(5) of the B. N. S. , 2023.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons abducted Haru Mukherjee and Vijay Oraon and demanded ransom of Rs. 10,00,000/-. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioners are not named in the F. I. R. It is next submitted that without putting the petitioners on Test Identification Parade as mentioned in para - 4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 27. 04. 2026, charge sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para -5 of the said supplementary affidavit. It is next submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 13. 12. 2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 18 of the bail application. It is then submitted that on the basis of the confessional statement of the petitioner no.
1, one toy type pistol was recovered which was used in commission of the offence. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti, in connection with Jariagarh P. S. Case No.
40 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. ) 07. 05. 2026 Sonu/
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.