Monu Kumar Alias Monu Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

2025:JHHC:16566

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 559 of 2025

------

Monu Kumar @ Monu Kumar Yadav, aged about 16 years, Son of Mahendra Yadav, resident of village Karkend Khatal, P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Putki, District-Dhanbad, represented through legal guardian and mother of Juvenile, Malo Devi aged about 41 years wife of Mahendra Yadav, resident of village-Karkend Khatal, P.O.-Kusunda, P.S. Putki, District-Dhanbad.

¶5

…… Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand …… Opp. Party

¶8

-------

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶10

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate For the State : Ms. Mohua Palit, APP

¶11

¶12

04/Dated:23^rd June, 2025

¶13

This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the Juvenile petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 21.03.2025 passed by Sri Rajni Kant Pathak, learned Special Judge, Children Court, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.50 of 2025 by which appeal has been dismissed and the prayer for bail of the Juvenile petitioner has been rejected thereby affirming the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate and Members of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad in connection with Putki P.S Case No.04 of 2025 for the offences under section 25(1-B)(a)/26/35 of the Arms Act.

¶14

As per FIR, it is alleged that this Juvenile-Petitioner along with one Dipu Pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey were apprehended by the police and on their search two (02) liver cartridges of KF 7.65 m.m were recovered from the possession of the JuvenilePetitioner and two (02) live cartridges of KF 7.65 m.m were also recovered from the possession of co-accused Dipu Pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey. It is also alleged that on their disclosure, one Desi

¶15

¶16

2025:JHHC:16566

¶17

Katta was recovered from the house of one co-accused Raj Kumar Bharti.

¶18

Heard Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Mohua Palit, learned APP for the State.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that allegation against the petitioner is false and concocted. It is submitted that the co-accused Dipu Pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey has already been enlarged on bail by Sri Prafull Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad in Bail Petition No.165 of 2025 vide order dated 20.03.2025 who was a major person. However, the case of the Juvenile petitioner has been rejected by the learned Principal Magistrate, learned Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad as well as the learned Special Judge, Children Court, Dhanbad, who was the similarly situated with one co-accused Dipu pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey. It is submitted that the Juvenile-petitioner is in custody since 05.01.2025 and hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. The web copy of the order dated 20.03.2025 passed in Bail Petition No.165 of 2025 has been produced during the course of argument, let it be kept on record.

¶20

On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is direct allegation against the Juvenile petitioner for recovery of two (02) live cartridges of KF 7.65 m.m. It is submitted that the Juvenile petitioner and another co-accused failed to produce any paper with regard to the arms seized in question. It is submitted that the petitioner has also criminal antecedent and it is admitted in his confessional statement for assaulting and snatching some amount from one Vijay Kumar Mishra and his friends and hence release of the Juvenile-petitioner

¶21

¶22

2025:JHHC:16566

¶23

would expose him to hardened criminals and hence the prayer for bail of the juvenile-petitioner may be rejected and the Criminal Revision Application may be dismissed.

¶24

Perused the FIR and the impugned judgments passed by the learned Court below and considered the submission of both the sides.

¶25

It appears that on 05.01.2025 the petitioner along with one co-accused Dipu Pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey was arrested by the police along with two (02) live cartridges of KF 7.65 mm each. 8. It appears that one co-accused namely Dipu pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey has already granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad in Bail Petition No.165 of 2025 vide order dated 20.03.2025.

¶26

Cconsidering the custody of the Juvenile petitioner and also considering that the co-accused- Dipu Pandey @ Dipu Kumar Pandey has been granted bail by Sri Prafull Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad in Bail Petition No.165 of 2025, the juvenile petitioner-Monu Kumar @ Monu Kumar Yadav is directed to be released on bail in care and supervision of his mother namely, Malo Devi on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/(Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned In-charge Principal Magistrate of the Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad in connection with Putki P.S Case No.04 of 2025 and the mother of the juvenilepetitioner will submit her Aadhar Card and mobile number before the learned Court below, which she will always keep active and will not change it, during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of the Court and shall produce the juvenile-petitioner as and when required.

¶27

Accordingly, in view of the above, the judgment dated 21.03.2025 passed by Sri Rajni Kant Pathak, learned Special

¶28

¶29

2025:JHHC:16566

¶30

Judge, Children Court, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.50 of 2025 and the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate and Members of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad in connection with Putki P.S Case No.04 of 2025, are set aside.

¶31

Thus, the Criminal Revision No.559 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of.

¶32

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶33

Saket/

¶34

Monu Kumar Alias Monu Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

Monu Kumar Alias Monu Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishwanath Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Birendra Singh Yadav Alias Birendra Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chhutu Singh Sardar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sandeep Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Bhakat Vs Santoshi Bhakat

Ranjan Raj Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand