Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13843 (JHR)

ASHISH KUMAR SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.A(DB)/147/2026 · 2026-02-16

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:4225-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.147 of 2026 Ashish Kumar Singh, aged about 19 yrs. S/o Bhagwan Singh, R/o H.No. 34 Bhatia Basti, P.G. Path, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Kadma, Dist. East Singhbhum. … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … Respondent ------- Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ------- For the Appellant : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P. ------- Order No.02/Dated- 16.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.12.2025 passed in B.P. No.1011 of 2025 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad arising out of Bankmore P.S. Case No.263 of 2025, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 3. It has been alleged that Bankmore P.S. Case No.263 of 2025 was instituted on the basis of the disclosures made by Tauqeer Raja, Suraj Tandi and Ashish Kumar Singh (appellant) who had been brought for interrogation in Rajganj P.S. Case No.80 of 2025. In course of interrogation, the accused persons had disclosed the manner in which they were terrorizing the businessmen for the purposes of extortion. 4. Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the appellant that there has been no recovery effected on the disclosure made by the appellant. Learned counsel submits that whatever has been gathered by the police appears to be on the disclosure of the appellant as well as the two apprehended accused persons. 5. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant. 2026:JHHC:4225-DB 6. Regard being had to the manner of implication of the appellant and the fact that no recovery has been effected on his disclosure apart from the period of custody undergone by him which is since 13.10.2025, we while setting aside the order dated 16.12.2025 passed in B.P. No.1011 of 2025 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad arising out of Bankmore P.S. Case No.263 of 2025, direct that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Learned C.J.M., Dhanbad in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No.263 of 2025. 7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Dated: 16th February, 2026 Sachin/