Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7680 (JHR)

PRAFULLA PANDEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./10098/2025 · 2026-04-22

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:12024 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. no. 10098 of 2025 Prafulla Pandey, aged about 58 years son of Govind Pandey resident of Mukul Colony, H. No. 31183, Sankosai, Road No.4, P.O.-Ulidih, P.S.- Mango (Ulidih), District- Seraikella (Kharsawan). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K.Choudhary , Adv. For the State : Mr. Azeemuddin , Addl.. PP For the informant : Mr. Anurag Kashyap , Adv. 07 / 22.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.88/2025 instituted under Sections 316/318/338/336/340/61(2) of the BNS. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner took a total amount of Rs. 6,50,000/- in installments, for arranging a permit for the bus of the informant from West Bengal instead of giving a proper permit, the petitioner gave one forged permit and tax papers and for which, the informant had to pay an additional penalty of Rs. 3,50,000/-. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and chargesheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 16 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 04.09.2025 , as mentioned in para 8 of this bail application. 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, hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts of the case, 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 JMFC, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.88/2025 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 22.04.2026 Smita/-