Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3172 (JHR)

TETAR GANJHU ALIAS TETAR KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./1474/2026 · 2026-04-07

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:9870 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.1474 of 2026 ------ Tetar Ganjhu @ Tetar Kumar, aged about 25 years, son of Late Tulsi Ganjhu, Resident of Village-Butkuriya, P.O. and P.S.-Kunda, Dist.-Chatra. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated- 07-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.10 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. No.290 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 & 61(2) of the BNS, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons has committed murder of Umesh Ganjhu. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion; as he earlier assaulted Umesh Ganjhu and except this suspicion, there is no other material in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is next submitted that on being led to discovery by the co-accused Jaswant Ganjhu, the mobile phone of the deceased has been recovered. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2025 as is evident from para-13 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Chatra in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.10 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. No.290 of 2025 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 will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 07/04/2026 Abhiraj/