Allowed¶17

Manoj Ram Alias Manj Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Dec 2025B.A./7595/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed; BNS 2023 Sections 316(2), 318(4); Jainagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025; land sale agreement; refusal to execute sale deed; refund of Rs.2,55,000 by demand draft lodged with Registrar General; informant to be identified by lawyer; bail bonds Rs. 20,000 with two sureties; SDJM Koderma; Jharkhand High Court Ranchi; Ambuj Nath, J.; December 9, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Koderma; demand draft of Rs.2,55,000/- kept in office of Registrar General to be handed over to the informant on identification by his lawyer. ¶17

Manoj Ram Alias Manj Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. (2025:JHHC:36896) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7595 of 2025

¶2

Manoj Ram @ Manj Ram, aged about 35 years, son of Dharam Ram, resident of village- Pipcho, P.O.- Makatpur, P.S.- Jainagar, District- Koderma

¶3

… Petitioner - Versus -

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party

¶5

¶6

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶7

----For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Diwakar Jha, Advocate

06/09.12.2025

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of the B.N.S., 2023, pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Koderma.

¶12

Petitioner and co-accused persons are alleged to have entered into an agreement with the informant for sale of land. Rs.10,00,000/- was paid to the accused persons including the petitioner. Thereafter, the accused persons refused to execute the sale deed.

¶13

Mr. Randhir Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner received Rs.2,55,000/- and he is ready to return the same.

¶14

Mr. Diwakar Jha, learned counsel for the informant submitted that the informant agreed to receive Rs.2,55,000/-, which was given to the petitioner.

¶15

Mr. Randhir Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner hands over the demand draft of Rs.2,55,000/- in the court. It was further submitted that demand draft may be kept on the record and the same should be handed over to the informant when he appears.

¶16

The demand draft of Rs.2,55,000/- be kept in the office of Registrar General of this Court and the same be handed over to the informant on his being identified by his lawyer.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025.

¶18

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶19

December 9, 2025 Jay/-

Manoj Ram Alias Manj Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Ram Alias Manj Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Rizwanullah Alias Rijwan Ullah Alias Rijwanullah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tripurari Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md. Saddam Hussain Vs State of Jharkhand

Ram Jajo Alias Ram Jojo Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bablu Soni Alias Rajendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mintu Kumar Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand