JYOTILAL MAHATO ALIAS JYOTI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./1398/2026 · 2026-03-20
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10341 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10341 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:7867
1 | P a g e
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.1398 of 2026
Jyotilal Mahato @ Jyoti, aged about 26 years, S/o. Durga Charan Mahato, R/o. Dungridih, P.O. & P.S.- Chowka, Dist.- Seraikella Kharsawan, Jharkhand.
… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Adv. For the State
: Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, APP
Order No.03/Dated- 20.03.2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.
2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Ichagarh P.S. Case No. 69 of 2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 309(4) & 311 of the B.N.S., 2023 subsequently cognizance has been taken under Sections 310(2) & 115(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 & 35 of the Arms Act, which is pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Chandil.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons. It is further submitted that petitioner was neither put on T.I. Parade nor any incriminating article was recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that other co-accused persons, namely, Rajesh Namta @ Rajesh Namata and Sanjay Das, with similar allegations, have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.03.2026 passed in B.A. No. 1586 of 2026 and order dated 18.03.2026 passed in B.A. No. 1565 of 2026 and the case of the petitioner stands on better footing. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the investigation and
2026:JHHC:7867
2 | P a g e
trial of the case and abides by all terms and conditions which may be imposed. Hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail.
4. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner as well as in view of other co-accused persons have been granted bail by co- ordinate bench of this Court, I find substance in the contentions raised on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Chandil in connection Ichagarh P.S. Case No. 69 of 2025 with condition that petitioner shall appear physically on each and every date during the trial of case till its conclusion unless his physical appearance is dispensed with for sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and with further condition that petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
20.03.2026 Rahul Uploaded on 23/03/2026