Allowed

Ramod Ram Alias Ramod Bhuiyan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026B.A./6008/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application by Ramod Ram @ Ramod Bhuiyan accused under Sections 25(1-B)a and 26 of the Arms Act, the High Court allowed bail on Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to cooperating with the trial and not disturbing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Class, Garhwa.

Ramod Ram Alias Ramod Bhuiyan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

[ 2026:JHHC:27659 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6008 of 2026

¶2

------

¶3

Ramod Ram @ Ramod Bhuiyan, aged about 22 years, Son of Kishun Ram, Resident of Village- Birbal, P.O.- Birbal, P.S.Dhurki, District- Garhwa (Jharkhand)

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

-----CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Syed Tafazzul Sajid, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, Addl.P.P.

¶9

------

¶10

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

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a/26 of the Arms Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is an accomplice of the coaccused persons who were found roaming under suspicious circumstance with illegal fire-arm and were apprehended by the police team. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that co-accused confessed before the police that the petitioner has handed over the said fire arms to him. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.02.2026 as mentioned in para-14 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, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶14

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

¶15

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/-

¶16

(Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1^st Class, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No. 86 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.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Dated:- 14.09.2026 Amar/

Ramod Ram Alias Ramod Bhuiyan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramod Ram Alias Ramod Bhuiyan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases