SHARAD MAHATO ALIAS HAU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2026-05-07. SHARAD MAHATO ALIAS HAU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
( 2026:JHHC:13616 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2180 of 2026 ------ Sharad Mahato @ Hau, aged about 20 years, son of Kushal Mahato, resident of Village-Murup, P. O. -Seraikella, P. S. - Seraikella, Dist. -Seraikella, Kharsawan … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Ganjhu, Addl. P. P. ------ Order No. 05 Dated- 07. 05. 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S. T. No. 187 of 2025 arising out of Gamharia P. S. Case No. 62 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/238(A) of the B. N. S. , 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 26. 11. 2025 in B.
A. No. 9239 of 2025. It is further submitted that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, three witnesses including the father and mother of the deceased have been examined and none of them have stated anything to implicate the petitioner in this case as they have no personal knowledge as to how the deceased who was their son had died. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 16 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 20. 06. 2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
It is lastly submitted that the co-accused person with similar allegation has already been admitted to bail by coordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 05. 01. 2026 and 22. 01. 2026 in B. A. Nos. 8759 of 2025 and 11598 of 2025 respectively. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P. P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner 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 A. S. J. -I, Seraikella, in connection with S. T. No. 187 of 2025 arising out of Gamharia P. S. Case No.
62 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. ) 07. 05. 2026 Gunjan-
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.