MD IMRAN ALIAS KUKKU ALIAS IMRAN v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./5249/2026 · 2026-06-16
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16802 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16802 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:17359 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.5249 of 2026
------ Md. Imran @ Kukku @ Imran, aged about 21 years, son of Md. Faruque, resident of Mojahid Nagar, Makka Masjid, Azad Road, P.O. & P.S.-Hindpiri, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 16-06-2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.137 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Section 304(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner snatched away the mobile phone of the informant and fled away. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is also submitted that even though the petitioner is not named in the FIR, yet T.I.P. has not been conducted. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-11 of this bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.04.2026 as is evident from para-06 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on
bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be 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 learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.137 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 16/06/2026 Abhiraj/