Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27975 (JHR)

DURGA PRASAD SAW v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.A(DB)/1276/2026 · 2026-10-06

Ram Sharma, Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:29826-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1276 of 2026 Durga Prasad Saw, son of Janki Saw, resident of Village: Dahiyari, Post Office: Paraswani, Police Station: Paraswani, District: Bokaro. ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … Respondent --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SHARMA For the Appellant : Mrs. Sonali Bhattacharjee, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --- 02/06.10.2026 Heard Mrs. Sonali Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.P.P. This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.07.2026 passed in B.P. No. 637/2026, arising out of Barwadda P.S. Case No.136/2025 by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. It has been alleged that there was a dispute with respect to a plot and the accused persons had tried to raise a boundary wall of the said plot. It has further been alleged that one sutli bomb was thrown which did not however explode. About two days prior to the incident, someone had called Lakhiram Mahto claiming himself to be the appellant and had demanded Rs.5,00,000/- as extortion money. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been implicated on the basis of suspicion. It has been submitted that the investigation has failed to establish that it was the appellant who had called Lakhiram Mahto and had demanded extortion money of Rs.5,00,000/-. Learned counsel adds that the matter has been compromised between the parties. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is in custody since 09.07.2026. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant. Regard being had to the period of custody undergone by the appellant and the failure of the investigation to ascertain that it was the appellant, who had demanded extortion money, we while setting aside the order dated 31.07.2026 passed in B.P. No. 637/2026, arising out of Barwadda P.S. Case No.136/2025 by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad direct the appellant 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad, in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No.136/2025. This appeal is allowed. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.) (RAM SHARMA, J.) 06.10.2026 S.B. Uploaded on 08.10.2026 -2-