Bokul @ Anwar Sheikh @ Bokul Shekh @ Anwar Sekh Vs State of Jharkhand

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, A.P.P. ------

¶17

02/Dated: 17.06.2026

¶18

1. This bail application has been filed under Sections 483 and 484 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.37 of 2024, corresponding to S.T. Case No.83 of 2026 (supplementary), which is pending before the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur.

¶19

2. The grounds have been taken that the allegations against the present petitioners are general and omnibus.

¶20

3. It has been contended that the prayer for regular bail of the present petitioners has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.02.2026 passed in B.A. No.591 of 2026.

¶21

¶22

2026:JHHC:17510

¶23

4. It has been submitted that the petitioners are languishing in judicial custody since 29.08.2025.

¶24

5. It has also been submitted that the chargesheet has already been submitted and even the charge has been framed.

¶25

6. It has also been submitted that the co-accused, namely, Soiyab Shekh @ Kalam Shekh and Charkauddin Shekh @ Chirakuddin Shekh @ Charkuuddin Shekh have been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 05.02.2026 passed in B.A. No.10611 of 2025.

¶26

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that the present bail application may also been allowed.

¶27

8. Mrs. Shweta Singh, learned A.P.P. for the Opp. Party-State, however, has vehemently opposed the prayer for regular bail. But she is fair enough to admit the fact on the quantum of custody of the petitioners and the release of co-accused persons on bail.

¶28

9. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

10. The prayer for regular bail of the present petitioners although has been rejected vide order dated 25.02.2026 passed in B.A. No.591 of 2026 but considering the fact of custody, i.e., the petitioners are in custody since 29.08.2025 and the charge has also been framed, therefore, is of the view that the present bail application needs to be allowed.

¶30

11. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed.

¶31

12. In consequence thereof, the petitioners, named above, are

¶32

¶33

2026:JHHC:17510

¶34

directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Madhupur, in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.37 of 2024, corresponding to S.T. Case No.83 of 2026 (supplementary) with the condition that the petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent themselves on the date fixed without any cogent cause. In failure, the learned trial court is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law so that the trial be not hindered.

¶35

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶36

17.06.2026 Rohit/-

¶37

Bokul @ Anwar Sheikh @ Bokul Shekh @ Anwar Sekh v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bokul @ Anwar Sheikh @ Bokul Shekh @ Anwar Sekh v. 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

Digmber Singh Alias Digamber Singh Vs Directorate of Enforcement, Govt of India, Represented by Assistant Director

Awadh Kishor Mehra And Ors. Vs Personnel And Adminis Reform

Braj Mohan Sharma And Ors. Vs Finance

Sanjeev Kumar Panda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nitai Dan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Gupta Vs Directorate of Enforcement