Pravin Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Pravin Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed: petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latehar, subject to conditions of non-interference with the informant/witnesses, cooperation with the trial, and furnishing mobile phone number and Aadhar Card copy with an undertaking not to change the mobile number during trial.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Pravin Ram, accused in Bariyatu P.S. Case No. 70 of 2024 (S.T. Case No. 116 of 2025) under Sections 126(1), 115(1), 109(1), 324(5), 324(6), 308(2), 308(4), 326(f) of BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, should be admitted to bail.

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the facts stated, the court was inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The court below was directed to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latehar, in connection with Bariyatu P.S. Case No. 70 of 2024 (S.T. Case No. 116 of 2025).

Key takeaways

Bail was made conditional on the petitioner not annoying or disturbing the informant or other witnesses in any manner during the trial and cooperating with the trial of the case.ratio¶12
The petitioner was further required to furnish his mobile phone number and a photocopy of his Aadhar Card in the court below, with an undertaking not to change the mobile phone number during the trial.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL — GRANTED — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.), 01.07.2026, B.A. No. 3143 of 2026: Petitioner Pravin Ram, accused in Bariyatu P.S. Case No. 70 of 2024 (S.T. Case No. 116 of 2025) under Sections 126(1), 115(1), 109(1), 324(5), 324(6), 308(2), 308(4), 326(f) of BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleged to have fired upon coal-laden trucks, set a vehicle on fire after pouring oil, and demanded levy money claiming himself to be a member of JJMP extremist organization; petitioner not named in the FIR and chargesheeted without TIP; in jail custody since 12.12.2025 with no witness examined; court, considering submissions of counsel and the facts stated, directed release 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 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latehar, conditioned on non-annoyance/non-disturbance of the informant and witnesses, cooperation with the trial, and furnishing of mobile phone number and Aadhar Card photocopy with an undertaking not to change the mobile number during trial.

[ 2026:JHHC:19283 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3143 of 2026

Pravin Ram , aged about 29 years, Son of Sundar Ram, resident of village -Bhageya, Barwatoli P.O. & P.S. Balumath, District Latehar, Jharkhand … Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioner : Mr. Divya Prakash , Adv. For the State : Ms. Kumari Rashmi, Addl. PP

03 / 01.07.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bariyatu P. S. case no. 70 of 2024 (S.T. case no. 116 of 2025) instituted under Section 126 (1), 115(1), 109(1), 324(5), 324 (6), 308 (2), 308 (4), 326 (f) of BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner fired upon the trucks loaded with coal and one bullet hit the tyre of the vehicle and as soon as the driver got down from the truck, the petitioner abused him and set the vehicle on fire by pouring oil upon the vehicle and demanded levy money claiming himself to be the member of JJMP extremist organization. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and though the petitioner is not named in the FIR yet without putting the petitioner on TIP, as mentioned in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit of the Bail Application, chargesheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 12.12.2025 , as mentioned in para 10 of this bail application as yet no witness has been examined in this

case. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the trial of the case and undertakes not to annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner 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 Additional Sessions Judge, Latehar in connection with Bariyatu P. S. case no. 70 of 2024 (S.T. case no. 116 of 2025) with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case.

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Dated 01.07.2026 Smita/-