Vivek Mukherjee @ Dilip Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vivek Mukherjee @ Dilip Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad, subject to conditions of co-operation with trial, furnishing mobile number and Aadhar Card copy with undertaking not to change the mobile number, and non-interference with the informant and witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 30.06.2025 in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025 (sections 303(2) B.N.S. 2023), should be enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

The Court enlarged the petitioner on bail, directing his release on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad, in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025.

Ratio / Principle

Bail is conditional on the petitioner co-operating with the trial and furnishing his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case.

Key takeaways

Bail is further conditioned that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED — S. 303(2) B.N.S., 2023 — High Court of Jharkhand (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) in B.A. No. 1875 of 2026, order dated 09.04.2026, enlarged the petitioner Vivek Mukherjee @ Dilip Thakur on bail in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025. Allegation (per counsel) was involvement, along with co-accused, in theft of three trucks; the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. and his name transpired from the confessional statement of co-accused Shyamlal Mahato, who had already been admitted to bail by the same Court on 26.02.2026 in B.A. No. 853 of 2026. Charge sheet filed against the petitioner with four other co-accused; charge framed but no witness examined; petitioner in custody since 30.06.2025. Released on a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad, subject to conditions: co-operation with the trial; furnishing mobile number and Aadhar Card copy with undertaking not to change the mobile number during trial; and not annoying or disturbing the informant or witnesses.

( 2026:JHHC:10169 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1875 of 2026

Vivek Mukherjee @ Dilip Thakur, aged about 40 years, son of Ajit Mukherjee, Resident of Sindurpur, P.O. and P.S. – Baliapur, District –Dhanbad.

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kr., Addl. P.P.

------

Order No.03 Dated- 09.04.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 303(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the co-accused persons were involved in commission of theft of three trucks. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that police submitted charge sheet against the petitioner along with four other coaccused persons and charge has already been framed but no witnesses have been examined so far. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused –Shyamlal Mahato. It is then submitted that the co-accused person–Shyamlal Mahato, has already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 26.02.2026 in B.A. No. 853 of 2026. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.06.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 17 of the bail application. It is further 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. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named 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 Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad, in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an 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 . )

09.04.2026 Sonu/