Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25213 (JHR)

ALOK MUKHI @ SAWAN v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./7124/2026 · 2026-09-07

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:26891] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7124 of 2026 ------ Alok Mukhi @ Sawan, aged about 21 years, son of Sudesh Mukhi, resident of Harijan Basti, Slag Road, Bhalubasa, P.O. & P.S. – Sitaramdera, District – East Singhbhum. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-04 Dated:-07-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No. 160 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 286 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331(1), 305 of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed house breaking and theft of gold and silver jewelleries, coins and cash of Rs.2,500/- from the house of the informant. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that though the petitioner is not named in the FIR yet he has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the CCTV Camera visuals which CCTV was disabled by the petitioner. It is also submitted that no witness has been examined as yet as mentioned in para-2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 21.08.2026. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2025 as mentioned in para-19 of the instant bail application. 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 each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No. 160 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 286 of 2026 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:- 07.09.2026 Saroj/