MUKHTAR ANSARI ALIAS MOKTAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./7968/2026 · 2026-08-25
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24009 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24009 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:JHHC:25601] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.7968 of 2026
------ Mukhtar Ansari @ Moktar, aged about 72 years, Idrish Miyan, resident of Village Muramu, P.O. Makka, P.S. Jobang, District- Lohardaga (Jharkhand).
.... .... ….
Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State
: Mr. Someshwar Roy, Addl.P.P.
------
Order No:-02 Dated:-25-08-2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No. 177 of 2026, arising out of Latehar PS. Case No. 19 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 400, 402, 412 of the I.P.C. and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26(2), 35 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was making preparation to commit dacoity and was apprehended by police and from the possession of the petitioner huge quantity of illegal arms and ammunition were recovered, besides several motorcycles and the petitioner along with the co-accused persons assembled to commit dacoity in Palamu Express. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.06.2025 as mentioned in para-15 of the instant bail application. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted but none of the witnesses have been examined. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to 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 released on bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
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 to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar in connection with S.T. Case No. 177 of 2026, arising out of Latehar PS. Case No. 19 of 2024 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and 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 he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 25.08.2026 Amar/