Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18546 (JHR)

MADHAV DAS @ AMRENDRA KUMAR MADHAV @ SUJIT KUMAR MITRA @ GURUJI @ SAHEB @ U. KR. DAS @ NARENRA DAS v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5918/2026 · 2026-06-30

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:19087] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5918 of 2026 Madhav Das @ Amrendra Kumar Madhav @Sujit Kumar Mitra @ Guruji @ Saheb @ Umesh Kumar Das@ Narendra Das, aged about 49 years, son of Late Raghunath Das, resident of Village Pahara, P.Ο. and P.S. Paraiya, District Gaya, Bihar. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners : Mr. D.K. Karmakar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. PP 02 / 30.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mihijam P.S. Case No. 14 of 2018 instituted under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed robbery in the bank and looted cash. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the two witnesses of the case, who were present at the bank, at the time of the occurrence being the informant and Badal Ram, examined a PW 5 and PW1 respectively, have not identified the petitioner, during their examination as witnesses in the court. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 16.09.2021, 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 CJM, Jamtara in connection with Mihijam P.S. Case No. 14 of 2018 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 30.06.2026 Smita/-