MINTU KUMAR PASWAN @ MINTU PASWAN v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./4263/2026 · 2026-06-08
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15902 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15902 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[ 2026:JHHC:16380] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4263 of 2026
Mintu Kumar Paswan @ Mintu Paswan, aged abot 28 years, son of Prameshwar Paswan, resident of village- Lohar Mahalla, Barkagaon, P.O. & P.S.- Barkagaon, Dist.- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
… Opp. Party
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl.. PP
02 / 08.06.2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Keredari P. S. case no. 67 of 2024 instituted under Sections 302, 34 of IPC and Section 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of the common intention with the co- accused persons, has committed murder of Yogendra Kumar and in para 46 of the supplementary case diary, it has categorically been mentioned that Jagarnath Munda and Saheb Kumar caught hold of the deceased and Rahul Munda fired at the deceased. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in conducting reiki of the deceased but there is no allegation against the petitioner of either being present or playing any role in firing at the deceased. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 18.11.2025, as mentioned in para 15 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co- operate with the trial of the case and undertakes not to annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case, hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner 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 learned JMFC, Hazaribagh in connection with Keredari P. S. case no. 67 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Dated 08.09.2026
Smita/-