Allowed

Shanti Toppo v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026B.A./5118/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi granted bail to the petitioner, who was accused of illegal possession of firearms under the Arms Act, directing him to furnish a bond with sureties and cooperate with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Order to be enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, undertaking to cooperate with the trial and not to disturb witnesses.

Shanti Toppo Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

[ 2026:JHHC:27660 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5118 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Shanti Toppo, aged about 41 years, W/o Shri Munn Toppo, R/o Village- Raghu Donga Toli, Harmu, PO: Lohardaga, P.S: Lohardaga, District- Lohardaga, Jharkhand -835302.

¶5

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶8

------

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Krishna Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl.P.P

¶11

------

¶12

Order No:-02 Dated:-14-09-2026

¶13

Heard the parties.

¶14

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No. 16 of 2026, arising out of Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 110 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a)/26/35 of the Arms Act.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that one country-made pistol and one magazine and four live cartridges have been recovered from the possession of the co-accused Brij Mohan Bhagat and one country made pistol and one live cartridge recovered from the possession of coaccused Raju Mahli. It is next submitted that in the confessional statement of the co-accused persons namely Brij Mohan Bhagat, Raju Mahli, Amar Oraon, Eklavya Oraon and Kushal Oraon @ Chama have taken the name of the petitioner to be involved with them in the said illegal possession of said fire arms. It is next submitted that no in incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.11.2025 as mentioned in para 15 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence,

¶16

it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 Sessions Judge, Lohardaga (Jharkhand) in connection with S.T. Case No. 16 of 2026, arising out of Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 110 of 2025 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶20

Dated:- 14.09.2026 Amar/

Shanti Toppo v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Toppo v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases