SURENDAR KUMAR MAHATO ALIAS GOLAK ALIAS SURENDRA MAHATO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./6557/2026 · 2026-07-14
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20281 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20281 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:20834 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.6557 of 2026
------ Surendra Kumar Mahato @ Golak @ Surendra Mahato, aged about 28 years, S/o Hari Mahato, R/o Village-Khanderi, P.O. + P.S.- Barwadda, District-Dhanbad.
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 14-07-2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No.73 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 111(3)/ 111(4)/ 308(4)/ 351(3) of the B.N.S.,
2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was member of an organized gang of criminals of Prince Khan @ Chhote Sarkar gang and was making ransom calls to the informant over phone. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Devanand Singh @ Chandan Singh and his self- confessional statement. It is also submitted that there is no allegation of payment of any ransom amount and the petitioner is an ailing person. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.15 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 07.05.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 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 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 J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad, in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No.73 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 14/07/2026 Abhiraj/