MD. KAIF ALIAS MD. KAIF ALAM v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./6529/2026 · 2026-07-14
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20305 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20305 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:JHHC:20766] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.6529 of 2026
------ Md. Kaif @ Md. Kaif Alam, aged about 23 years, Son of Md. Irfan Alam, Resident of Barinagar, Telco, P.O. & P.S.- Telco, District- East Singhbhum
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Tejo Mistry, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated-14-07-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No.52 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 132, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of his common intention with the co-accused, attempted to commit murder of the Forest Guard. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-15 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is next submitted that the injury sustained by the alleged victim, is simple in nature as mentioned in paragraph No.78 of the Case Diary and two horns of deer were seized from the petitioner and the co- accused persons. It is also submitted that the co-accused, with similar allegations, has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 24.06.2026 passed in B.A. No.5699 of 2026. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and that he will not annoy or disturb the
witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2026 as has been mentioned in para-01 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.
Learned Spl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.
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 learned S.D.J.M, Chandil in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No.52 of 2026 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case, 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 will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-14.07.2026-Animesh/