Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6432 (JHR)

DURJAN JATE @ DURGA JATE v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3113/2026 · 2026-04-18

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:11352] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. no. 3113 of 2026 Durjan Jate @ Durga Jate, aged about 32 years, son of Karam Singh Jate, resident of Village-Dimbuli, P.O. & P.S.- Manoharpur, District-West Singhbhum (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar , Adv. For the State : Mr. Praful Jojo , Addl. PP 02 / 18.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 308(3), 308(4), 308(5), 351(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the member of CPI Moist banned organization and was caught by the police with pamphlets of the said organization while from the co-accused person, 15% of the work estimate was recovered, which was used for demanding extortion money. It is next submitted that one keypad mobile phone and SIM were recovered. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-14 of the instant bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.12.2025 as mentioned in para-17 of the instant bail application and charge sheet has been submitted in this case. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case and undertakes not to annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case. It is next submitted that the co-accused with similar allegations has already been admitted on bail by this court vide order dated 16.04.2026 passed in B.A. No. 3046 of 2026 hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner 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 S.D.J.M., Sub Divisional Court, Chakradharpur, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 18.04.2026 Smita/-