Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5019 (JHR)

JISHAN AKHTAR ALIAS JISHU ALIAS AFRIDI ALIAS SARDAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./11427/2025 · 2026-02-19

Rajesh Kumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:4931 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.11427 of 2025 Jishan Akhtar @ Jishu @ Afridi @ Sardar, aged about 27 years, son of Md. Yusuf, resident of Purani Ranchi, near Akhada Chowk, P.O GPO Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. J. S. Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, A.P.P --------- 03/Dated: 19 th February, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant, who is in custody since 10.04.2025, has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T No.480 of 2025, arising out of Kanke P.S. Case No.90 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 103(1)/ 61(2)/ 3(5) of BNS, and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner – XVII, Ranchi. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that complete set of F.I.R along with its enclosures have been annexed with the present bail application and there is no suppression on his/ her part. Innocence of the applicant has been claimed and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. It has been submitted that except confessional statement, there is no other material against this applicant. Further, similarly situated co-accused has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025, passed in B.A. No.8252 of 2025 although there was money trail. This applicant's case is on much better footing. It has further been submitted that the main accused has been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. It is settled principal of law that parity is not applicable - 1 - B.A. No.11427 of 2025 2026:JHHC:4931 in the arena of bail jurisprudence. It is a broad daylight murder and it is well organized crime committed in an organized manner. This applicant is played active role in commission of the crime. Merely because the main accused has been granted the anticipatory bail that cannot be a ground for granting bail to the other co-accused. 6. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant is, hereby, rejected. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 19th February, 2026 Ravi-Chandan/- Uploaded on 20.02.2026 - 2 - B.A. No.11427 of 2025