Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17250 (JHR)

INAMUL v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5472/2026 · 2026-06-19

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:17956] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5472 of 2026 ------ Inamul, aged about 22 years, Son of Zibraile, Resident of Village- Ramkol, P.O. + P.S.- Hanwara, District- Godda, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-19-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No.33 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 305, 331(4) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed theft of jewellery from the jewellery shop of the informant. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of confessional statement and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.02.2026 as mentioned in para- 19 of the instant bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-15 of the instant bail application. It is next submitted that the co-accused, with similar allegations, has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 21.04.2026 passed in B.A. No.3326 of 2026. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Godda in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No.33 of 2026 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 19.06.2026 Saroj/