Ravi Oraon @ Bala Vs the State of Jharkhand

( 2026:JHHC:20780 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6579 of 2026

Ravi Oraon @ Bala, aged about 30 years, s/o Maghya Oraon, r/o Village-Sankosai, Road No. 5, Near Tower Maidan, P.O.+P.S.-Mango, Dist.-Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum

¶3

… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶6

------

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State : Ms. Anuradha Sahay, Addl. P.P.

¶9

------

¶10

Order No.02 Dated- 14.07.2026

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 204 of 2026 arising out of Mango (Olidih) P.S. Case No.293 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/238(a)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of Pradeep Saw. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the main culprit is Kundan Singh. It is then submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was one of the associates of Kundan Singh but assaulting the deceasedPradeep Saw with chopper is upon the co-accused-Kundan Singh. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the coaccused-Sonu Gorai. It is next submitted that charge has been framed but no witness has been examined as yet. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.12.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during

¶14

the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused person with similar allegation has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 30.06.2026 in B.A. No.5963 of 2026. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶15

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶16

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 A.S.J.-II, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, in connection with S.T. No. 204 of 2026 arising out of Mango (Olidih) P.S. Case No.293 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that 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

Gunjan-

¶19

14.07.2026

Ravi Oraon @ Bala v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Oraon @ Bala 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Purn Kumar Swansi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Krishna Kumar Gupta @ Krishna Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Badal Raj Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rohan Gope Alias Poltu Gope Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arif Ansari Alias Arbaz Alias Arbaz Ansari Alias Arbaj Vs the State of Jharkhand