Allowed¶4

Vikash Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Feb 2026B.A./215/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand HC Ranchi B.A. No. 215 of 2026 (order dated 20.02.2026, Rajesh Shankar, J.): regular bail granted to Vikash Kumar, accused under Sections 310(4) BNS 2023 and Sections 25(1B)(a)/26/35 Arms Act in Korrah P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025 (alleged dacoity preparation; recovery of five gold chain pieces and a mobile phone; judicial custody since 18.10.2025), on bail bond Rs.20,000/- plus two like sureties before ACJM Hazaribag.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted: petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag, in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025. ¶4

Vikash Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:5193

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 215 of 2026

¶3

¶4

Vikash Kumar, S/o Tapeshwar Prasad, R/o VillageKoriyadih, P.O. & P.S.-Barhi, District-Hazaribag

¶5

.......... Petitioner

¶6

-VersusThe State of Jharkhand .......... Opp. Party

¶7

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----For the Petitioner : Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. ----- Order No.02 Date: 20.02.2026

¶9

Date: 20.02.2026

¶10

The petitioner is an accused in the case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Sections 25(1B)(a)/26/35 of Arms Act.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. There is alleged recovery of five pieces of chain said to be made of gold and a mobile phone from the possession of the petitioner. As per the F.I.R., the petitioner along with other co-accused persons was making preparations to commit dacoity. However, mere recovery of such chain from the possession of the petitioner does not substantiate that the petitioner was in any manner preparing to commit dacoity. He has been implicated in the present case merely on suspicion. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 18.10.2025. Hence, he may be given the privilege of regular bail.

¶12

2026:JHHC:5193

¶13

Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner’s prayer for sregular bail.

¶14

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025.

¶15

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶16

20.02.2026 Vikas/ Uploaded on 21.02.2026

¶17

Vikash Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar 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

Khushilal Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Sulekha Kumari Vs Central Coalfields Ltd.

M/S Basant Stone Works (Gstin 20AALFM5467EIZE) through Its Proprietor Dinu Babu Vs Union of India through Its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance

Sukhmay Modi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravindra Yadav Alias Ravindra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bimal Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand