BUDHU MARDI @ DOCTOR MARDI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./5478/2026 · 2026-06-19
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17252 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17252 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:JHHC:17953] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.5478 of 2026
------ Budhu Mardi @ Doctor Mardi aged about 38 years son of Ramchandra Mardi resident of L-4, Quarter No.-3, Road No.10, P.O.+P.S.- Bistupur, District- East Singhbhum (Jhamshedpur) .... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, Advocate
Mr. Prathik, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Addl.P.P.
------
Order No:-02 Dated:-19-06-2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No.90 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1389 of 2017 (S) in S.T. Case No. 114 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 323, 307, 427, 148, 149, 341, 342, 324 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was a member of an unlawful assembly and was assaulting some persons by branding them to be child lifters and when asked by the police not to indulge in such act, the mob attacked the police party causing injury to the police personnel. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are false and general and omnibus in nature. It is then submitted that the petitioner is a permanent employee of Uranium Corporation of India Limited, which is a public sector undertaking. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 07.04.2026 as mentioned in para-8 of the instant bail application. 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 Additional Sessions Judge-V, Jamshedpur in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No.90 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1389 of 2017 (S) in S.T. Case No. 114 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/