Madhu Ramani vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1704 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Madhu Ramani vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 10 March, 2026

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     B.A. No. 1265 of 2026
                               ------

Madhu Ramani, aged 66 Years, S/o Late Manik Ramani, Resident of Village -Chilkara, P.O. & P.S. -Pathargama, District -Godda, Jharkhand.

                                       ...        Petitioner
                               Versus
     The State of Jharkhand            ...       Opposite Party
                                ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Atul Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, Addl. P.P.

------

Order No.04 Dated- 10.03.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Pathargama P.S. Case No.138 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly attempted to murder Hardhan Ramani and the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is an old man of 66 years of age. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para -13 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.12.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 13 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named 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 S.D.J.M., Godda, in connection with Pathargama P.S. Case No.138 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an 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 informant or the witnesses of the case or the family members of the informant in any manner during the trial of the case.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 10.03.2026 Sonu/