Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19970 (JHR)

MUKESH SHARMA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./6438/2026 · 2026-07-10

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(2026:JHHC:20516) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6438 of 2026 Mukesh Sharma, aged about 33 years, son of Dilranjan Sharma, resident of village – Sekha Chak, Panchayat – Khutahari, PO & PS – Sahebganj, Kalyanchak, District – Sahebganj, Jharkhand. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Priyanshu Nilesh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 10th July, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 146 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person attempted to murder Ashish Sharma and Ketan Sharma and also committed theft of Rs. 4200/- and gold chain. It is next submitted that for the self -same occurrence from the side of the petitioner, Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 145 of 2026 was first lodged and as the counterblast this false case has been instituted and the petitioner had no intention to kill anybody; as there was free fight between the parties. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has been in custody since 06.05.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 21 of the bail application. It is next 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 or 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 abovenamed 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 S.D.J.M., Rajmahal, in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 146 of 2026, with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the 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.) Dated – 10.07.2026 Aditi