Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18213 (JHR)

RAHUL RAJ ALIAS RAHUL DEO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5850/2026 · 2026-06-29

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:18906 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5850 of 2026 ------ Rahul Raj @ Rahul Deo, aged about 18 years, son of Ambuj Kumar, Resident of Qtr. No. B-1082, Sector 2, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. –Jagarnathpur, Ranchi, District –Ranchi -834004. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 29.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.485 of 2025, S.T. No. 299 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 281, 125(a), 125(b) of the B.N.S., 2023 and later on Section 105, 324(4), 324(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 were added. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was driving his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit the husband of the informant and fled away from the spot. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has no intention to kill the victim. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –13 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.01.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. It is then submitted that though charge has already been framed in this case but no witness has been examined so far. 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. 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 Additional Judicial Commissioner- XIII-cum-Special Judge-III, CBI (Other than AHD), Ranchi, in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.485 of 2025, S.T. No. 299 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 29.06.2026 Sonu/