The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to the petitioner accused of robbery under Section 394 IPC, directing him to furnish a bond with sureties and submit mobile number and Aadhaar details.
Petitioner enlarged on bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, furnishing mobile number and Aadhaar copy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[ 2026:JHHC:27654 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8519 of 2026
------
Bablu Pandey, aged about 40 years, son of late Kailash Pandey, resident of village – Bekobar, P.O. – Bekobar, P.S. – Domchanch, District – Koderma.
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sudir Kr. Mahto, Addl.P.P.
------
Order No:-02 Dated:-14-09-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed robbery and caused injury to the victim and looted Rs.70,000/- from the house and 5,000/- from the informant and also looted the jewelleries at the point of pistol and assaulted the wife of the informant, when she protested. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that though the petitioner is not named in the FIR but without putting him on T.I. Parade as mentioned in para-08 of the instant bail application, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner but no witness has been examined as yet. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.06.2026 as mentioned in para-10 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.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
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 S.D.J.M., Koderma in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2023 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.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
Dated:- 14.09.2026 Saroj/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a robbery case punishable under Section 394 IPC.
Bablu Pandey
The State of Jharkhand
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
