Mahesh Sao Alias Mahesh Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mahesh Sao Alias Mahesh Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M.F.C XXXI, Ranchi, subject to appearing on every trial date, not threatening witnesses and co-operating in trial; trial court empowered to cancel bail on any adverse report.

Issue for consideration

Whether Mahesh Sao @ Mahesh Sahu, in custody since 21.09.2025 in connection with Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2025 (registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109, 126(2), 115(2), 324(4) and 324(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 of Damage of Public Property Act), should be enlarged on regular bail.

Court's answer

Having regard to the facts of the case, the allegation against the petitioner, the grant of bail to the co-accused by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, and the petitioner's custody since 21.09.2025, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of J.M.F.C XXXI, Ranchi, in connection with Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2025.

Key takeaways

As conditions of the bail, the petitioner must appear before the learned trial court on each and every date, must not threaten any witness, and must co-operate in the trial.ratio¶18
If any adverse report comes against the petitioner, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal bail — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Deepak Roshan, J.), B.A. No. 235 of 2026, decided 20.02.2026: Mahesh Sao @ Mahesh Sahu v. The State of Jharkhand. Regular bail was sought in respect of Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2025, registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109, 126(2), 115(2), 324(4) and 324(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 of Damage of Public Property Act. Counsel for the petitioner pleaded false implication, absence of criminal antecedent, custody since 21.09.2025, readiness to abide by imposed conditions, and parity with co-accused Mina Devi, Priya Kumari, Kunal Yadav and Dinesh Ray, who had already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench in B.A. Nos. 10374, 10901 and 10900 of 2025 (orders dated 19.11.2025 and 03.12.2025); the learned A.P.P opposed the prayer. Having regard to the allegation against the petitioner, the co-accused parity and the period in custody since 21.09.2025, the Court enlarged the petitioner on bail on a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M.F.C XXXI, Ranchi, directing attendance before the trial court on each and every date, abstention from threatening witnesses and co-operation in trial, with liberty to the learned trial court to cancel the bail upon any adverse report.

2026:JHHC:5249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 235 of 2026

Mahesh Sao @ Mahesh Sahu, aged about 30 years, son of Late Ramsewak Sao, resident of Village Karge, P.O. & P.S. Mandar, District Ranchi .... Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite party

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Manindra Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P

02/20.02.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109, 126(2), 115(2), 324(4) and 324(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 of Damage of Public Property Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that other co-accused persons, namely, Mina Devi, Priya Kumari, Kunal Yadav and Dinesh Ray have already been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 10374 of 2025, 10901 of 2025 & 10900 of 2025 vide order dated 19.11.2025 and 03.12.2025 respectively and the case of the petitioner stands on similar footing to that of co-accused. He further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 21.09.2025; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by every condition as imposed by this Court.

1

2026:JHHC:5249

4. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner.

5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts of the case and looking to the allegation made against this petitioner, coupled with the fact that other co-accused persons have been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court and also the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 21.09.2025; hence, I am inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the above-named Petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M.F.C XXXI, Ranchi in connection with Sukhdeo Nagar (Pandra O.P) P.S. Case No. 514 of 2025.

6. It is made clear that the Petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and he shall not threaten any witness and shall co-operate in trial and if any adverse report will come against this Petitioner, learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of this Petitioner.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

20^th February, 2026 jk Uploaded on 24/02/2026

2