MUKESH RAM @ AZAD @ RAVI @ KULLU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Cr.A(DB)/319/2026 · 2026-04-18
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Criminal Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6558 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6558 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:11228-DB )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 319 of 2026
Mukesh Ram @ Azad @ Ravi @ Kullu, S/o Late Nanku Ram, R/o Village- Purani Palheya, P.O. & P.S.- Manika, District- Latehar
... … Appellant
Versus State of Jharkhand
... … Respondent
---------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
---------
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the State
: A.P.P.
---------
I.A. No. 3065 of 2026
02/18.04.2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
This interlocutory application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning a delay of 43 days in filing the appeal.
Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed and the delay of 43 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
I.A. No. 3065 of 2026 stands disposed of.
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 319 of 2026
This appeal is directed against the order dated 12.12.2025 passed in B.P. No. 556/2025, arising out of Latehar P.S. Case No. 218/2020, by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Latehar, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
It has been alleged that there was an exchange of firing between the Police personnel and the extremists and being outmaneuvered the extremists had fled away. Several incriminating articles were recovered from the place of occurrence.
Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been implicated on suspicion. It has further been submitted that
Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:11228-DB )
several similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 579 of 2023, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1459 of 2022 and Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1188 of 2022.
Learned counsel adds that the appellant is in custody since
08.10.2025.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
Regard being had to the manner of implication of the appellant and the fact that several similarly situated co- accused persons have been granted bail as noted above, we while setting aside the order dated 12.12.2025 passed in B.P. No. 556/2025, arising out of Latehar P.S. Case No. 218/2020, by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Latehar, direct that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Latehar in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No. 218/2020.
This appeal stands allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Dated, the 18th April, 2026 A. Sanga/- Uploaded on 18 /04/2026