NITESH KUMAR ALIAS NITISH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Cr.A(DB)/156/2025 · 2025-06-16
Ambuj Nath, Rongon Mukhopadhyay
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5074 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5074 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:15654-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 156 of 2025
-------
Nitesh Kumar @ Nitish Kumar
…... …. Appellant(s)
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.…. …. Respondent
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-------- For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
For the State
: Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, Advocate
--------
04/ Dated 16.06.2025
Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, learned A.P.P on behalf of the State.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.01.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ramgarh in B.P. No.248/2024, arising out of Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.135/2024, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
It has been alleged that in the midnight of 21.05.2024, two persons belonging to T.P.C. Naxal organization came to the work site of the informant and asked him to stop the work and also asked him to remove the payloader from there. In order to create panic, they also opened fire but nobody was injured and the payloader was set ablaze by the miscreants. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the only incriminating factor against the appellant seems to be the confessional statement of Badal Ganjhu as well as the self- confession of the appellant, apart from the fact that the location of the payloader was given by the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant is in custody since 23.10.2024. Since the name of the appellant has transpired on the confessional statement of co-accused Badal Ganjhu, without any other corroborative evidence, no prima facie case is made out in terms of Section 43 D (J) of the U.A.P. Act. Learned Special P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.
-2- Regard being had to the aforesaid, we, while setting aside the order dated 08.01.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ramgarh in B.P. No.248/2024, arising out of Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.135/2024, direct that the appellant, above named, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Rohit Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class at Ramgarh, or his successor, in connection with B.P. No.248/2024, arising out of Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.135/2024. This appeal is allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Ambuj Nath, J.) BS-Saurav/-