Agam Kumar @ Pammi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Agam Kumar @ Pammi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with Pindajora P.S. Case No.103 of 2025 (S), conditioned on co-operating in the trial and not absenting himself on fixed dates without cogent cause.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Agam Kumar @ Pammi, in custody since 27.11.2025 in connection with Pindajora P.S. Case No.103 of 2025 (S), is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Vishwajeet Rai @ Sachin Rai and Kumar Sourav, who had already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration that co-accused Vishwajeet Rai @ Sachin Rai (B.A. No.9093 of 2025, order dated 07.10.2025) and Kumar Sourav (B.A. No. 7789 of 2025, order dated 25.09.2025) had been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench — facts not disputed by the learned APP — and that the petitioner had been in jail custody for about four months, this Court, considering the issue of parity, held that the bail application deserved to be allowed.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro, subject to the condition that he shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on dates fixed without cogent cause; in case of failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that the trial be not hindered.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed on parity with bailed-out co-accused — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.), B.A. No. 2458 of 2026, decided 1 April 2026. Application under Sections 483 and 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Agam Kumar @ Pammi, in custody since 27.11.2025, seeking bail in Pindajora P.S. Case No.103 of 2025 (S), registered under Section 103 (1) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro. Held: co-accused Vishwajeet Rai @ Sachin Rai had been granted bail in B.A. No.9093 of 2025 (order dated 07.10.2025) and co-accused Kumar Sourav in B.A. No. 7789 of 2025 (order dated 25.09.2025) by the co-ordinate Bench, facts expressly not disputed by the learned APP for the State; petitioner in jail custody for about four months; considering parity, application allowed. Petitioner directed to be released on bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned J.M., 1st Class, Bokaro, with condition to co-operate in the trial and not absent himself without cogent cause, failing which the trial court may pass appropriate orders.

2026:JHHC:9185

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 2458 of 2026

---------

Agam Kumar @ Pammi, aged about 31 years, Son of Siwadhar Choudhary, Resident of Village-Baba Nagar, Chas, P.O. & P.S.- Chas, District-Bokaro

… … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opp. Party

---------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

----------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Tarun Kumar, APP ---------- 02/Dated: 1^st April, 2026

The instant application has been filed under Sections 483 and 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Pindajora P.S. Case No.103 of 2025 (S) registered under Section 103 (1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Bokaro.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused namely Vishwajeet Rai. The petitioner is not named in the FIR.

It has been submitted that the other co-accused person, namely, Vishwajeet Rai @ Sachin Rai has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No.9093 of 2025 vide order dated 07.10.2025; further coaccused, namely, Kumar Sourav has also been granted

Page | 1

2026:JHHC:9185

bail by the Co-ordinate Bench in B.A. No. 7789 of 2025 vide order dated 25.09.2025 and the case of the present petitioner falls on the same footing. The petitioner is in custody since 27.11.2025.

Therefore, claiming the ground of parity, submission has been made that the present petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the opposite party-State although has seriously opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the fact of grant of bail in favour of the co-accused persons.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.

This Court has taken into consideration the fact that the other co-accused person, namely, Vishwajeet Rai @ Sachin Rai has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No.9093 of 2025 vide order dated 07.10.2025; further co-accused, namely, Kumar Sourav has also been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench in B.A. No. 7789 of 2025 vide order dated 25.09.2025, which has not been disputed by learned APP appearing for the State and the petitioner is in jail custody for about four months, as such, considering the issue of parity, this Court is of the view that the present application deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed.

Page | 2

2026:JHHC:9185

In consequence thereof, the petitioner named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1^st Class, Bokaro in connection with Pindajora P.S. Case No.103 of 2025 (S)with the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that the trial be not hindered.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

1^st April, 2026 Alankar /-

Page | 3