MANOJ KUMAR MANOJ KUMAR MAHTO v. 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 2026-04-29. MANOJ KUMAR MANOJ KUMAR MAHTO v. STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
(2026:JHHC:12620) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 3592 of 2026 Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Mahto, aged about 45 years, son of Mangar Mahto @ Mangru Mahto, resident of village – Gondalpura, PO – Badam, PS – Barkagaon, District – Hazaribag, Jharkhand. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl. P. P. ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------th Order No:- 03, Dated:- 29 April, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Barkagaon P. S. Case No. 262 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(1), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 140(1), 310(2) of the B. N. S.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly, he armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the employees of the informant and looted valuable materials. It is further submitted that the alleged victims namely, Deepak Kumar Pandey, G. Swami, Ashwini Kumar and K. Rao sustained bruise and body ache and pain. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 25. 03. 2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 6 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 informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case and also the petitioner will not indulge in any offence while on bail.
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 st of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 Class, Hazaribag, in connection with Barkagaon P. S. Case No. 262 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 informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. ) Aditi
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.