Mukund Bera Vs State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mukund Bera Vs State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appellant to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar; the bail-rejection order dated 20.01.2026 set aside; 22-day filing delay condoned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant should be released on bail notwithstanding the rejection of his bail prayer by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar, given his custody since 03.12.2025 and the bail earlier granted to co-accused Peer Ali Khan @ Pir Ali Khan.

Court's answer

The order dated 20.01.2026 of the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar rejecting the appellant's bail is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

The delay of 22 days in filing the appeal is condoned and I.A. No. 4690 of 2026 stands allowed and disposed of.

Key takeaways

The appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail – rejection by Sessions Judge, Deoghar set aside; release ordered. Cr. A. (DB) No. 430 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand (DB), decided 15.04.2026 (Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, JJ.). Appellant Mukund Bera, apprehended in a hotel raid concerning an alleged inter-state plan to steal crude oil from the Haldia-Barouni pipeline (arising out of Jasidih P.S. Case No.350 of 2025), had his bail prayer rejected by the Sessions Judge, Deoghar in B.P. No. 16 of 2026 (order dt. 20.01.2026). Counsel urged parity with co-accused Peer Ali Khan @ Pir Ali Khan, already granted bail in Cr. A.(DB) No. 93 of 2026, and noted custody since 03.12.2025; the Spl.P.P. did not dispute these facts. A 22-day delay in filing was condoned (I.A. No. 4690 of 2026). The Division Bench set aside the rejection order and directed the appellant's release on a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Deoghar; appeal allowed.

2026:JHHC:10641-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A. (DB) No. 430 of 2026

Mukund Bera, aged about 34 years, son of Kali Bera, resident of VillageBar Baijitpur, P.O. & P.S.-Bhawanipur, District-East Medninagar (WB)

... ... Appellant

Versus

The State of Jharkhand …… Respondent

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

-------For the Appellant : Mr. Awanish Shekhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P. --------

Order No. 02/ Dated: 15^th April, 2026

I.A. No. 4690 of 2026

Heard Mr. Awanish Shekhar, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl.P.P.

This interlocutory application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning the delay of 22 days in filling of the instant appeal.

Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant interlocutory application, the same is allowed and the delay of 22 days in filling of this appeal is hereby condoned.

The aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.

Cr. A. (DB) No. 430 of 2026

This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in B.P. No. 16 of 2026 arising out of Jasidih P.S. Case No.350 of 2025, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.

It has been alleged that on information that some members of the inter-state gang were planning to commit theft of crude oil from the Haldia-Barouni pipeline, a raid was conducted in a hotel where the

2026:JHHC:10641-DB

appellant and other accused persons were apprehended.

Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that in similar circumstances one of the co-accused, namely Peer Ali Khan @ Pir Ali Khan has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. A.(DB) No. 93 of 2026. It has further been submitted that the appellant is in custody since 03.12.2025.

Learned Spl.P.P. though has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant but does not dispute the aforesaid facts.

Regard being had to the above, we while setting aside the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in B.P. No. 16 of 2026 arising out of Jasidih P.S. Case No.350 of 2025, direct the appellant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar.

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

15.04.2026

Arpit Uploaded on 17/04/2026

2