BITTU KHAN ALIAS UMER GUL ALIAS MD.UMER GUL v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./1886/2026 · 2026-03-13
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10163 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10163 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:6827 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1886 of 2026
Bittu Khan @ Umer Gul @ Md. Umer Gul, son of Md. Kamrul, aged about 21 years, resident of village – Mohanpur P.O. Pachamba P.S. Pachamba District – Giridih (Jharkhand)
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Md. Razaullah Ansari, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mahto, Advocate
--- 03/13.03.2026
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.12.2025 in connection with Giridih (M) P.S. Case No.375/2025, registered under Section 303 (2), 318 (2) of BNS, now pending in the court of Ld. S.D.J.M, Giridih. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was engaged in training the informant for driving the car and in the meantime when the petitioner received the call from his employer, he left and it has been alleged by the informant that his service revolver is taken away by the petitioner and it was recovered from the house of the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel submits that it was only out of mistake that the service revolver remained in the car and he has further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 04.12.2025 and charge sheet has already been submitted. 5. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the informant had engaged the petitioner to train him in driving, and that the informant later found his service revolver missing when the petitioner left with the car, and further considering that the charge sheet has already been submitted, as well as the custody of the petitioner and no criminal antecedent as stated by the petitioner in the bail application, the petitioner is directed to be
2026:JHHC:6827 2
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 the Ld. S.D.J.M, Giridih in connection with Giridih (M) P.S. Case No.375/2025, on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court. 7. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 8.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:13.03.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:13.03.2026