Allowed

Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Sept 2026B.A./8027/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under B.A. No. 8027 of 2026, the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi granted bail to the petitioner Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto in connection with Section 103(1), 3(5) offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. The court imposed specific conditions including a bail bond, sureties, and restrictions on moving residence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to specified conditions.

Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27960

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

B.A. No. 8027 of 2026

¶4

Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto, aged about 19 years, Son of Raj Kumar Mahto, Resident of Village-Chauda, P.O. and a police stationTandwa, District-Chatra. … … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---

¶7

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶8

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Himanshu Harsh, Advocate

¶10

04 /16.09.2026

¶11

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶12

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 02.03.2026 in connection with Simaria P.S. Case No. 39 of 2026, for the alleged offence registered under Section 103(1), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Chatra as S.T. No. 229 of 2026.

¶13

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has submitted that the name of the petitioner has come in the confessional statement of the co-accused namely Ashok Mahto and apart from that there is nothing against the petitioner.

¶14

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State and the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that out of 10 witnesses, 4 witnesses have already been examined before the learned court and the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail at this stage. They have submitted that as per the confessional statement of the co-accused Ashok Mahto- the husband , the petitioner was holding the leg of the deceased while the husband was committing the alleged offence.

¶15

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the name of the petitioner has transpired on

¶16

¶17

2026:JHHC:27960

¶18

the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused and coaccused namely Banti Kumar has already been enlarged on bail in B.A. No. 4898 of 2026 vide order dated 04.06.2026, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/(Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Chatra in connection with Simaria P.S. Case No. 39 of 2026 as S.T. No. 229 of 2026 on the following conditions:

¶19

(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.

¶20

(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.

¶21

(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.

¶22

(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

¶23

(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below.

¶24

6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

¶25

7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’.

¶26

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶27

16.09.2026 Rakesh/Uploaded on:-16.09.2026

¶28

Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nageshwar Kumar @ Sachin Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases