Concerning the bail granted to Mrityunjay Kumar Singh, also known as Mrityunjay or Sonu Singh, by the High Court of Jharkhand. The Union of India appealed against the High Court's decision to grant bail to Mrityunjay Kumar Singh, who was a respondent in a case investigated by the National Investigating Agency (NIA).

1. Background:
• The incident occurred on 22.11.2019, where members of the banned terrorist organization CPI (Moist) fired at a patrolling party of Chandwa Police Station, resulting in the death of four police personnel.
• The NIA took over the investigation, re-registered the case, and filed a chargesheet against 34 individuals, including the respondent, for various offenses under IPC, UAP Act, and Arms Act.
2. Bail Application and High Court Decision:
• The respondent filed a bail application before the Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, which was rejected on 18.11.2021.
• The respondent then appealed to the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi, under Section 21 of NIA Act, and on 30.01.2023, the High Court granted bail with specified conditions.
3. Arguments and Contention:
• The appellant, represented by the Additional Solicitor General of India, argued against the grant of bail, highlighting the respondent's alleged involvement in supporting the terrorist organization and posing a threat to witnesses.
• The respondent's counsel, a Senior Counsel, defended the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the conditions of bail were not violated and citing previous cases where the respondent was granted bail or acquitted.
4. Court's Analysis and Decision:
• The Supreme Court analyzed the arguments and reviewed the evidence on record.
• It referenced legal principles regarding bail and the discretion of the court to grant or cancel bail.
• The Court noted that the conditions of bail were not violated and observed no strong reason to set aside the High Court's order.
• However, it allowed the prosecution to seek bail cancellation if conditions were violated and clarified that observations made in the current order would not influence trial proceedings.
• Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision to grant bail to the respondent.