MANTU SINGH @ MANTU GANJHU @ DILESH v. STATE OF JHARKHAND
Cr.A(DB)/834/2026 · 2026-07-28
Arun Kumar Rai, Rongon Mukhopadhyay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22193 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22193 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:22278-DB )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 834 of 2026
-------
Mantu Singh @ Mantu Ganjhu @ Dilesh, aged about 27 years, son of Shankar Singh, resident of Village Kedal, P.O. & P.S. Manatu, District Palamau, Jharkhand.
…... ….
Appellant (s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .…. …. Respondent
--------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
-------- For the Appellant(s) : Mrs. Juhi Kumari, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P
Order No. 02/ Dated 28.07.2026 I.A. No.8186 of 2026
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.P.P. This interlocutory application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning a delay of 01 day in filing the appeal.
Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed and the delay of 01 day in filing the appeal is hereby, condoned.
The aforesaid I.A. stands disposed of. Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 834 of 2026
This appeal is directed against the order dated 22.04.2026 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.450/2026, arising out of Simariya P.S. Case No.161/2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
It has been alleged that on a raid conducted by the police, one Vairo Ganjhu @ Bhaskarjee was apprehended and several arms and ammunitions were recovered.
Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that though the appellant is named in the First Information Report but he has been implicated on the disclosure made by the apprehended accused Vairo Ganjhu @ Bhaskarjee. It has further been submitted that the appellant is in custody since 21.01.2026 and save and except the confessional statement, there are no other materials which would be indicative of the fact that the appellant was involved in extremist activities.
-2-
Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and submitted that the appellant has 16 criminal antecedents.
Regard being had to the manner of implication of the appellant, we, while setting aside the order dated 22.04.2026 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.450/2026, arising out of Simariya P.S. Case No.161/2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra, direct that the appellant, above named, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra, in connection with Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.450/2026, arising out of Simariya P.S. Case No.161/2022, subject to the condition that the appellant shall be physically present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial. This appeal is allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
Dated 28/07/2026
BS/-