Jharkhand High Court
Raju Ram @ Dhruv Jee vs The State Of Jharkhand …. …. …. … on 7 July, 2026
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
[2026:JHHC:19988]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.5153 of 2026
------
Raju Ram @ Dhruv Jee, aged about 48 years, son of Late Dukhan
Ram, resident of Village Hotai, P.O. Asehar, P.S. Panki, Dist.
Palamau
…. …. …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …. …. …. Opposite Party
——
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
——
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, Addl.P.P.
——
Order No:-03 Dated:-07-07-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Panki
P.S. Case No.08 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 557 of 2024
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 386/387/414/34
of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act
and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation
against the petitioner is that the petitioner being a member of J.J.M.P.,
a banned extremist outfit, used to collect levy from the contractors. It
is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is
then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case
only on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused persons
namely Dharmendra Kumar Bhuiyan, Satan Uraon, Jagan Uraon and
Raju Sao. It is also submitted that except the confessional statement,
there is no other material in the record to implicate the petitioner in
this case. It is further submitted that though the charge sheet has been
submitted against the petitioner and charge has already been framed
but no witness has been examined as yet. It is next submitted that the
petitioner has been in custody since 04.10.2025 as is evident from
para-1 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 C.J.M., Palamau in connection
with Panki P.S. Case No.08 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.
557 of 2024 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:- 07.07.2026
Saroj/
