Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3693 (JHR)

HARIOM SINGH ALLIAS HARIOM KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./11543/2025 · 2026-01-21

Gautam Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:1633 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11543 of 2025 ------ Hariom Singh @ Hariom Kumar, S/o Laxmi Singh, R/o Village-Belkapi, P.O.-Belkapi, P.S.-Gorhar, District-Hazaribag, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate Ms. Taru Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, APP ------ Order No.04 / Dated : 21.01.2026. Heard both the sides. This bail application has been filed on behalf of Hariom Singh @ Hariom Kumar who is in custody since 25.04.2025 in connection with Charhi P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 & 35 of the Arms Act, 1959 pending in the Court of J.M. 1st Class, Hazaribag is pressed into motion. Mr. Prashant Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that no offence under Section Arms Act will be made out as no arms was seized from the conscious physical possession of this petitioner, whereas the co-accused Ajit Kumar from whom the pistol was seized, has already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submits that a factually incorrect submission has been made on behalf of the petitioner, which will be apparent from the seizure list annexed at page no. 22 of the instant bail application, wherein one pistol loaded with two live cartridges was seized from this Petitioner. It is also submitted that this petitioner has criminal antecedents of being involved in six criminal cases. Mr. Prashant Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel has made a factually incorrect and misleading submission before the Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, is hereby, rejected. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/Uploaded 22.01.2026