Allowed

Sushil Tirkey v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026B.A./8488/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi, admitted the petitioner to bail in an NDPS case involving illegal possession of brown sugar. The direction includes furnishing a bond and various conditions, including contact details and non-disturbance of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and complying with specified conditions.

Sushil Tirkey Vs State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27568 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8488 of 2026

¶2

Sushil Tirkey, aged about 26 years, son of late Raju Tirkey, resident of H.No. AO 164, Road No. 3, Indrapuri Ratu Road, P.O.-Hehal, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶3

… Petitioner

¶4

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Riya Raj, Advocate : Ms. Rashi Sharma, Advocate For the State : Ms. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P.

¶7

------

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 14.09.2026

¶9

Heard the parties.

¶10

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.283 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 21(b)/22/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was in illegal possession of 3.06 grams of brown sugar which is also known as Heroin and from the co-accused persons taken together 11.16 grams of brown sugar have been recovered which comes under intermediate quantity. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.12 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.08.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 24 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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 Judicial Commissioner-cum-Special Judge, NDPS, Ranchi, in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.283 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.

¶14

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶15

14.09.2026

¶16

Gunjan-

Sushil Tirkey v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Tirkey 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases