Sambhu Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sambhu Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to five conditions: one bailor to be the petitioner's pairvikar; the other a close relative; attendance on each and every date with cancellation of the bail bond on a single default; deposit of a self-attested Aadhaar Card copy and mobile number (unchangeable without prior permission); and full co-operation with proceedings before the court below.

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner, in custody since 14.07.2025 for alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 205 of 2024 (G.R. No. 1016 of 2025). +2 more

Court's answer

Considering that there are general and omnibus allegations on the accused persons including the petitioner, that a similarly situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate bench, and that the petitioner is already in custody since 14.07.2025, the court directed that the petitioner be enlarged on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Godda.

Key takeaways

As a condition of bail, the petitioner must attend the court on each and every date, and on a single default the learned court below shall cancel the bail bond furnished by him.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted - High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, B.A. No. 12026 of 2025, decided 16.03.2026 (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.). Petitioner Sambhu Rai, in custody since 14.07.2025 for alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 arising out of Mahagama P.S. Case No. 205 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 1016 of 2025 pending before Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Godda, was enlarged on bail on a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, the court finding the allegations general and omnibus, a similarly situated co-accused already enlarged by a co-ordinate bench, and imposing strict conditions including attendance on each and every date with cancellation of the bail bond on a single default, pairvikar and close relative as bailors, deposit of self-attested Aadhaar Card and mobile number, and full co-operation with proceedings below.

2026:JHHC:7106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 12026 of 2025

Sambhu Rai, aged about 40 years, Son of Late Budhan Ray, resident of Village-Ghat Gorhiya, P.O. & P.S.- Mahagama, District-Godda.

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate

03 /16.03.2026

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.07.2025 in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 205 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 1016 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Godda.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is named in the First Information Report, but there is general and omnibus allegation on all the co-accused. He submits that admittedly there is land dispute between the parties and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He has referred to paragraph 17 of the bail application and submitted that he has no criminal antecedent. He has also submitted that some of the co-accused persons have been enlarged on anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 4222 of 2025 vide order dated 11.08.2025 and one co-accused has been enlarged on bail in B.A. No. 11939 of 2025 vide order dated 12.03.2026.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the victim has sustained grievous injuries on vital part of the body.

1

2026:JHHC:7106

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there are general and omnibus allegation on the accused persons including the petitioner and co-accused who is similarly situated has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate bench and the petitioner is already in custody since 14.07.2025, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/(Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Godda in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 205 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 1016 of 2025 on the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.

(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.

(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.

(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below.

6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

16.03.2026 Rakesh/Uploaded on:-17.03.2026

2