Disposed

Bablu Kumar Ram @ Bhatiya v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Sept 2026B.A./8611/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to Bablu Kumar Ram in a theft case involving Sections 457 and 380 IPC, directing him to furnish a bond and comply with conditions including surrendering mobile details and Aadhar card. No substantive legal reasoning was provided.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties subject to specific conditional undertakings.

Bablu Kumar Ram @ Bhatiya Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27977 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8611 of 2026

¶2

------

¶3

Bablu Kumar Ram @ Bhatiya, aged about 35 years, S/o Late Raju Ram, R/o Sector 4, Jhopari, P.O. & P.S.-Sector 4, District Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶7

------

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl.P.P

¶10

Order No.02 Dated- 16-09-2026

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Chadrapura P.S. Case No. 137 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1146 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 457 & 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed theft in the house of the informant by breaking the lock of the main gate of the house and took away the ornaments of the informant after breaking the almirah also. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Ritik Kumar and Rahul Kumar. It is next submitted that charge has been framed but no witness has been examined in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.04.2026 as mentioned in para-12 of the instant bail application. It is then submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to 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 released on bail.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶15

Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the learned ACJM, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Chadrapura P.S. Case No. 137 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1146 of 2023 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case .

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

16/09/2026 Abhiraj/

Bablu Kumar Ram @ Bhatiya v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu Kumar Ram @ Bhatiya v. the 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