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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Deoghar, in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026, subject to conditions of cooperating with the trial, furnishing mobile number and Aadhar Card copy with undertaking not to change the mobile number, and not annoying or disturbing witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Aditya Kumar, in custody since 05.06.2026 in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026 (registered under sections 111(2)(b), 109(1) & 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act), should be enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the facts discussed, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026.

Ratio / Principle

Bail was directed to be granted on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Deoghar, subject to conditions: cooperation with the trial, furnishing mobile number and a copy of Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking not to change the mobile number during the trial, and not to annoy or disturb the witnesses during the trial.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Aditya Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand (High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, B.A. No.6784 of 2026, Anil Kumar Choudhary, J., Order dated 21-07-2026): The Court enlarged the petitioner on bail in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026, registered for offences punishable under sections 111(2)(b), 109(1) & 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Deoghar. Bail was made subject to the conditions that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial, will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking not to change his mobile number during the trial, and will not annoy or disturb the witnesses in any manner during the trial. Counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the FIR named co-accused Shivam Raj as the person who fired upon the victim Abhishek Yadav and that the petitioner was implicated merely for presence at the place of occurrence, had no criminal antecedent, and had been in custody since 05.06.2026; the learned Addl. P.P. opposed the bail prayer.

( 2026:JHHC:21496 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6784 of 2026

------

Aditya Kumar, aged about 21 years, s/o-Madan Pd Ram, R/o Near Subhash Chowk, Castair Town, Deoghar, P.O. + P.S.-Deoghar, District-Deoghar.

.... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party -----CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, Addl.P.P ------

Order No.02 Dated- 21-07-2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 111(2)(b), 109(1) & 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons attempted to commit murder of Abhishek Yadav. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that in the FIR, there is direct and specific allegation that the co-accused Shivam Raj has fired upon the victim and the petitioner has been implicated in this case only because he was present at the place of occurrence. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.22 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.06.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no.22 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as

discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Deoghar, in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.68 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case .

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

21/07/2026 Abhiraj/