PRABHA DEE ALIAS PRABHA SOREN ALIAS PRABHA DI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Cr.A(DB)/169/2026 · 2026-03-23
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Civil Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1223 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1223 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:7990-DB )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 169 of 2026
Prabha Dee @ Prabha Soren @ Prabha Di, W/o Prashant Manjhi, R/o
Village: Jogi (Jobhi), Chakkudih, PO & PS: Madhuban, District: Giridih,
Jharkhand.
... Appellant
Versus The State of Jharkhand
… Respondent
--- CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
For the Appellant : Ms. Saman Ahmed, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, APP
--- 03/23.03.2026
Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.10.2025 passed in M.C.A. No. 2124 of 2025, arising out of Pirtand P.S. Case No. 51 of 2020 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
The appellant and some other accused persons were apprehended by the police and several incriminating articles including arms and ammunitions were recovered.
Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since 28.12.2020. It has further been submitted that one of the co-accused Ranjit Tuddu has been granted bail in B.A. No. 11528 of 2021.
Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
It appears from the status report, which was called for, that 13 witnesses have already been examined and only 4 witnesses are left to be examined and the tentative time, which shall be taken by the learned trial Court for conclusion of the trial is 3 months. So far as the grant of bail to the co-accused person is concerned, the same is distinguishable on account of the fact that the appellant was apprehended at the spot while the co-accused was implicated on the confessional statement of the apprehended accused.
In view of the fact that the trial is at its fag end, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 16.10.2025 passed in M.C.A. No. 2124 of 2025, arising out of Pirtand P.S. Case No. 51 of 2020 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih and consequently, we dismiss this appeal at this stage.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)
(PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.) 23.03.2026 S.B. Uploaded on 25.03.2026