LALA KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2026-04-29. LALA KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2813 of 2026 Lala Kumar, son of Nagendra Noniya … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate Ms. Sanskriti Shalini, Advocate Ms. Sumitra Kumari, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Azeemuddin, Advocate ---th 03/29 April 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Bishrampur P. S. Case No. 01/2026 for the offence registered under Section 103(1), 238, 61(2), 3(5) of BNS, now st said to have been pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1 Class, Palamau. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor he has related to the victim, who died in her matrimonial home.
He has submitted that the husband of the deceased and one lady were apprehended and they gave their confessional statements, taking the name of the petitioner and another co-accused, stating that the petitioner and co-accused were hired to commit the murder of the deceased. The learned counsel submits that except the confessions statement of co-accused and also that of the petitioner, there is no material to link the petitioner with the alleged offence. 3. Learned counsel for the opposite party, while opposing the prayer, has submitted that the manner in which the murder has been committed, as stated in the confession statement, matches with the post-mortem report. He has also submitted that there is one criminal antecedent of the petitioner, but it is under different nature of offence altogether. 4. To this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 13. 01. 2026 and the charge-sheet has already been submitted. 5.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and there appears to be no direction evidence against the petitioner and that the charge-sheet has already been submitted, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial st Magistrate-1 Class, Palamau in connection with Bishrampur P. S. Case No. 01/2026, subject to the following conditions: - (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.
(iv) The petitioner would deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his Mobile Number before the learned court below, which he shall not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J. ) Dated: 29. 04. 2026 Uploaded On: 30. 04. 2026 Mukul/-
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.