Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24516 (JHR)

SUMIT KUMAR VERMA @ SUMIT KUMAR v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./7916/2026 · 2026-08-28

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:25934 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7916 of 2026 Sumit Kumar Verma @ Sumit Kumar aged about 20 Years S/O Lal Mohan Rawani, Resident of Village: Nawadih (Chalniya), Post Office & Police Station: Bishnugarah, District: Hazaribag (Jharkhand). … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, Advocate --- 02/28th August 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 01/2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 613/2026 for the offence registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) of BNS and Sections 66(C), 66(D), 67 of IT Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier in B.A. No. 2749/2026 vide order dated 06.05.2026 on the alleged ground that one victim has been identified. The said victim was the person who had logged into the website for providing massage services. The petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2026 and the charge has been framed on 10.04.2026, but till date no witness has been examined. The learned counsel submits that there is no likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 3. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the custody of the petitioner since 02.01.2026 and the fact that the witnesses are not forthcoming for their examination and that there appears to be no 2026:JHHC:25934 2 likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 01/2026, subject to the following conditions: - (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner would deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his Mobile Number before the learned court below, which he shall not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 5. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 6. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e- mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 28.08.2026 Uploaded On: 29.08.2026 Mukul/-