Jharkhand High Court
B.A./4134/2026 of KARAN KUMAR MALLIK Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 29 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4134 of 2026 ------ Karan Kumar Malik, aged about 35 years, son of Darabari Ram, Resident of Village -Narsingh Bandh, Near Post Office, P.O. & P.S.- Tiraspur, District-Paschim Bardhman, West Bengal. .... .... …. Petitioner
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
( 2026:JHHC:29338 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.4134 of 2026
------ Karan Kumar Malik, aged about 35 years, son of Darabari Ram, Resident of Village -Narsingh Bandh, Near Post Office, P.O. & P.S.- Tiraspur, District-Paschim Bardhman, West Bengal.
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Tejaswa Mohanta, Advocate
For the State
: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.07 Dated- 29-09-2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Piparwar P.S. Case No.46 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 384, 385, 386, 435, 427, 504, 506, 34 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was demanding extortion from the driver of the truck i.e. informant and fired six rounds to create terror for extortion of money. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is also submitted that though, the petitioner is not named in the FIR, yet without putting him on TIP as mentioned in para- 12, charge sheet has been submitted in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of Rohit Oraon and Masi Tigga. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.11.2025, though it has not been mentioned in the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the learned SDJM, Chatra in connection with Piparwar P.S. Case No.46 of 2023 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 29/09/2026 Abhiraj/