Parweej Mussaraf @ Kaish @ Parwez Mussaraf Khan, aged v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3(5), 103(2), 109, 111(2)(a), 118(1), 126(2)
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 27
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner For the State : Mr. Vishal Kr. Trivedi, Advocate : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.03 Dated- 10.10.2025 ------ Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No.32 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 but after investigation charge sheet no. 93 of 2025 dated 17.05.2025 has been submitted under Section 103(2), 111(2)(a) & 3(5) of the B.N.S. and 25(1-b)a/25(1a)/26/27/35 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons committed the murder of Shivam Ghosh. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and in their confessional statement, the co-accused persons have categorically stated that it is Manoj Vibhar and Vishal Vibhar who have fired upon the deceased. It is then submitted that no witnesses have been examined so far in the trial. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.02.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 16 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the co-accused persons have already been admitted to bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated
17.09.2025 and 18.09.2025, in B.A. Nos. 6444 of 2025 and 8049 of 2025 respectively. 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 C.J.M., Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No.32 of 2025 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 in any manner during the trial of the case.
10.10.2025 Sonu/Gunjan- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.