KUNDAN KUMAR ALIAS KUNDAN RAJAK v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./1159/2026 · 2026-04-07
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5580 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5580 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
(2026:JHHC:9902) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1159 of 2026
Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Rajak, aged about 30 years, s/o Suresh Rajak, r/o village – Kendua, PO & PS – Saraiyahat, District – Dumka. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ Order No:- 03, Dated:- 07th April, 2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Saraiyahat P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 304(2), 3(5) of the BNS. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has snatched away Rs. 97,450/- along with Tab, biometric machine and mobile phone with charger kept in a bag. It is next submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and without putting him on T.I.P. as mentioned in para no. 10 of the bail application, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that no witness has been examined in this case. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 01.09.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 22 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. by filing counter affidavit submits that no explanation has been furnished by the I.O. of the case as to why he did not
conduct the T.I.P. of the petitioner, even though he is not named in the FIR, but, the petitioner is involved in two other cases also. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 J.M.F.C., Dumka, in connection with Saraiyahat P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025, with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Aditi