Allowed¶27

Tetar Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Feb 2026B.A./219/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail; BNS Sections 317(5), 341(1), 3(5); Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025; apprehension in car without relevant papers during vehicle checking on 09.10.2025; parity with co-accused already granted bail (B.A. No.11748 of 2025 and B.A. No.11502 of 2025, order dated 19.02.2026, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen); petitioner without criminal antecedent; bail bonds Rs.15,000/- with two like sureties; SDJM Godda; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Sanjay Prasad, J.; decided 20.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail: release on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Godda, in connection with Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025, subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner. ¶27

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody from 09.10.2025 in connection with Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025, should be granted regular bail.

¶12

Court's answer

Bail granted having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the custody of the petitioner, and the grant of bail to the co-accused persons.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner Tetar Kumar Das directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Godda, in connection with Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025, subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner.

¶26

Key takeaways

Bail Application No.219 of 2026 is allowed and stands disposed of.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application allowed (High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi; Sanjay Prasad, J.; order dated 20.02.2026). Petitioner Tetar Kumar Das, aged about 19 years, in custody since 09.10.2025 in Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025 for offences under Sections 317(5), 341(1) and 3(5) of BNS, was apprehended by police on 09.10.2025 while sitting in a car whose relevant papers could not be produced. The petitioner had no criminal antecedent, whereas co-accused had criminal antecedents of similar nature; co-accused Laxman Maraiya and Bikram Kumar Das @ Bikram Das had already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen) on 19.02.2026 in B.A. No.11748 of 2025 and B.A. No.11502 of 2025. Considering the custody and the bail granted to the co-accused, the petitioner was directed to be released on bail on bonds of Rs.15,000/- with two like sureties to the satisfaction of the SDJM, Godda, one bailor to be his own relative.

¶1

2026:JHHC:5392

¶2

In THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.219 of 2026

¶3

….

¶4

Tetar Kumar Das, Aged about 19 years, son of Kameshwar Ravidas, Resident of – Madhuri (Simanpur), P.O. and P.S.Ishipur (Barahat), District – Bhagalpur (Bihar).

¶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. Aman Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawin Kr. Singh, A.P.P

¶11

Order No.02/20^th February 2026

¶12

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail, who is in custody from 09.10.2025 in connection with Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 317(5), 341(1) and 3(5) of BNS.

¶13

As per the FIR, four persons were apprehended while they were sitting in a car by the police on 09.10.2025 and they were not able to produce the relevant papers of that said car.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the petitioner was only a co-passenger on that said car as he had taken lift in the car. It is submitted that the petitioner is studying in I.A and having no criminal antecedent. It is submitted that the two co-accused persons namely Laxman Maraiya and Bikram Kumar Das @ Bikram Das have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen) of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 in B.A. No.11748 of 2025 and B.A. No.11502 of 2025 respectively and has produced

¶15

¶16

2026:JHHC:5392

¶17

the status report of the allowing the said bail applications by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen) of this Court, let these status reports of B.A. No.11748 of 2025 and B.A. No.11502 of 2025, be kept on record.

¶18

It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner had been apprehended with three other accused persons who are named in the F.I.R. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent whereas the other co-accused has two criminal antecedents.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears that four persons including the petitioner had been apprehended during the vehicle checking by the Police on 09.10.2025.

¶21

It further appears that two co-accused namely Pritam Kumar, Vikram Das and Laxman Maraiya have criminal antecedents of similar nature. However, the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. 7. It further appears that the two other co-accused persons namely Laxman Maraiya and Bikram Kumar Das @ Bikram Das have already been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen) of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 in B.A. No.11748 of 2025 and B.A. No.11502 of 2025 respectively as it reveals from the Status Report obtained from the website of Hon’ble High Court of Jharkhand, by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶22

It appears that the petitioner is in custody since

2026:JHHC:5392

09.10.2025.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the custody of the petitioner and also considering the grant bail to the co-accused persons, the petitioner namely Tetar Kumar Das is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Godda or/his Successor Court in connection with Pathargam P.S. Case No.161/2025 subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner.

¶27

The Bail Application No.219 of 2026 is allowed and stand disposed of.

¶28

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶29

Dated :- 20.02.2026 Nishant/-

¶30

Tetar Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tetar Kumar Das 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

Anwar Ansari Alias Anwar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Guljar Ansari Alias Mintu Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kadon Munda Alias Kandon Munda Represented through His Father Karam Singh Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tirbini Kumar Mahto @ Trtiweni Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vinod Gorain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Guddu Prajapati Alias Dharmendra Prajapati Vs the State of Jharkhand