Allowed¶24

Md. Sekh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC24 Feb 2026Cr.A(DB)/206/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cr. A. (DB) No. 206 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, decided 24.02.2026: bail appeal allowed; fake currency case (Tapkara P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, four counterfeit notes recovered); appellant in custody since 14.09.2025, no criminal antecedent; bail-rejection order of 19.01.2026 (B.P. No.257 of 2025, Dist. & Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Khunti) set aside; release directed on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Khunti.

What did the court decide?

Release of the appellant on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Khunti; the bail-rejection order dated 19.01.2026 set aside. ¶24

Md. Sekh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:5396-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A. (DB) No. 206 of 2026

¶3

¶4

Md. Sekh, aged about 37 years, S/o Gulamuddin Sekh, R/o-vill.- Udhwa Amanat Diyara, P.O.-Diyara, P.S.-Radhanagar, Dist. Sahebganj

¶5

... ... Appellant

¶6

Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Respondent

¶7

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶9

-------For the Appellant : Mr. Sunil Kumar Ganjhu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. --------

¶10

Order No. 02/ Dated: 24^th February, 2026

¶11

Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Ganjhu, learned counsel for the appellant

¶12

and learned P.P.

¶13

This appeal is directed against the order dated 19.01.2026 passed in B.P. No.257 of 2025, arising out of Tapkara P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, by the learned Dist. and Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Khunti, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.

¶14

It has been alleged that the appellant was apprehended and four fake currency notes were recovered from his possession.

¶15

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since 14.09.2025. Learned counsel adds that the appellant does not have any criminal antecedent.

¶16

Learned Spl.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶17

Regard being had to the period of custody undergone by the

¶18

appellant, we while setting aside the order dated 19.01.2026 passed in B.P. No.257 of 2025, arising out of Tapkara P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, by the learned Dist. and Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Khunti, direct the appellant to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

¶19

¶20

Cr. A. (DB) No 206 of 2026

¶21

2026:JHHC:5396-DB

¶22

Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the

¶23

satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M, Khunti.

¶24