Allowed¶21

Vishnu Pradhan Alias Bishnu Pradhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jan 2026B.A./8759/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed; Section 27 Evidence Act disclosure statement rejected where seizure preceded the police statement; timing discrepancy between statement at 22:30 hours on 27.06.2025 and seizure of motorcycle at 16:53 hours the same day; confession leading to recovery; offences under Sections 103(1) and 238(A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Gamharia P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025; pending before C.J.M., Seraikella; U.D. Case lodged 15.05.2025 by father of deceased Devanand Pradhan; Hero Passion Pro motorcycle; petitioner in custody since 28.06.2025; bail bond Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like amount.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon 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 Court below. ¶21

Vishnu Pradhan Alias Bishnu Pradhan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B. A. No. 8759 of 2025

¶3

¶4

Vishnu Pradhan @ Bishnu Pradhan, S/o Sri Fulchand Pradhan, R/o VillageMahalimurup, P.O.-Burudih, P.S.-Seraikella, Dist.-Seraikella-Kharsawan

¶5

… …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

… …. Opp. Party

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, A.P.P.

¶12

Oral Order

¶13

05 / Dated : 05.01.2026

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

The petitioner named above has been made accused in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 103(1) and 238(A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the court of C.J.M., Seraikella.

¶16

The father of the deceased lodged U.D. Case on 15.05.2025 that his son Devanand Pradhan had left home on 13.05.2025 for Tatanagar by his Hero Passion Pro Motorcycle with his Mobile No. 9523234454 and thereafter he was traceless. On the same day, his dead body was recovered and, in the postmortem, the death was attributed to fatal injury, caused by hard blunt object. After conducting enquiry in the U.D. Case, the police lodged the FIR against unknown.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no legal evidence against the petitioner and he has been roped in this case only on the basis of the purported disclosure statement made by accused persons. The petitioner is in custody since 28.06.2025.

¶18

It is contended that the statement made before the police, cannot be said to be disclosure statement as it was made on 27.06.2025 at 22:30 hours, whereas seizure of the said motorcycle of the deceased was prepared on the same day at 16:53 hours. Apart from this, there is no material evidence against the petitioner.

¶19

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶20

Considering the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that the said disclosure statement was made at 22:30 hours, whereas the seizure of the motorcycle of the deceased has been done before the said time, confession leading to recovery cannot be accepted as a disclosure statement in terms of Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

¶21

Under the circumstance the petitioner, named above, 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 Court below.

¶22

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶23

AKT/Satendra Uploaded 06.01.2026

¶24

Vishnu Pradhan Alias Bishnu Pradhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Pradhan Alias Bishnu Pradhan v. the 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

Krishna Gopalka Vs Aditi Gopalka

Smt Ramdulari Devi Vs Lakshmi Naraan Sah

Rakesh Kumar Vs Aparna Kumari

Bhawani Mahto @ Bhawani Prasad Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Imran Ansari Alias Imran Khan Alias Imran Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Kumar Paswan Allias Rahul Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand