Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 263 (JHR)

VIJAY YADAV v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./89/2026 · 2026-04-01

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:9080 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 89 of 2026 --------- Vijay Yadav, aged about 25 years, s/o. Vigan Yadav, presently residing at Kuriam Khurd, Latehar, P.O. Holong B.O., P.S. Balumath, Dist. Latehar, Jharkhand. ....Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand ....Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Advocate Mr. Ayush Raj, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P. --------- 04/ 01.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant bail application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of regular bail for the offences registered under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 132, 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 27, 35 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, 1908. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner was not engaged in any criminal activity as alleged in the FIR and his name emerged in course of investigation and on the basis of confidential information received by the Police. No arms or any incriminating article has been recovered from his possession. Learned counsel further submits that one of the co-accused namely, Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Prasad @ Lathra has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.08.2025. He further submits that petitioner is languishing in custody since 01.09.2025; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by every condition imposed by this court. 4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 5. Having regard to the above, coupled with the fact that co- accused, having same and similar allegations, has been granted bail by 2026:JHHC:9080 2 this Court and also looking to the period of custody of the petitioner; I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar, in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1045 of 2025. 6. It is made clear that the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and if any adverse report will come against the petitioner, learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 1st April, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded on 02.04.2026