Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36644 (JHR)

DEVA ALIAS K DEVA RAO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./8269/2025 · 2025-09-25

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:29954 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8269 of 2025 Deva @ K. Deva Rao, aged about 23 years, S/o- K. Raju Rao, R/o- H.No. 1, Gurudwara Basti, P.O. & PS-Mango Town, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, at Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap ,Adv. For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. PP. 02 / 25.09.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mango P.S. Case No. 247 of 2023 (S), instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel appearing 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 murder of Pawan Bhaiya. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner was only present at the place of occurrence and he helped the informant in taking the deceased to the hospital prior to his death. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 06.06.2025. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co- operate with the trial of the case. It is next submitted that the co-accused with similar allegations have already been admitted on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 13.02.2025 passed in B.A. No. 1179 of 2025, order dated 26.09.2024 passed in B.A. No. 8496 of 2024, order dated 09.08.2024, passed in B.A. No. 5689 of 2024 keeping in view the specific allegation of the firing shot upon the deceased is against the co-accused Nishu hence, the petitioner may be admitted on regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for regular bail . Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner 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 Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Jamshedpur in connection with Mango P.S. Case No. 247 of 2023 (S), with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 25.09.2025 Smita/-