Jharkhand High Court
Cr.A(DB)/1044/2026 of PYARELAL TANTI @ PYARELAL KUMAR Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 8 September 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (D.B) No.1044 of 2026 Pyarelal Tanti @ Pyarelal Kumar, aged about 20 years, S/o- Bhola Tanti, R/o. Village-Kokrakhas, P.O. and P.S.-Balbedda, District-Godda (Jharkhand) … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand …
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B) No.1044 of 2026
Pyarelal Tanti @ Pyarelal Kumar, aged about 20 years, S/o- Bhola Tanti, R/o. Village-Kokrakhas, P.O. and P.S.-Balbedda, District-Godda (Jharkhand)
… Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
… Respondent
----------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. S. S. Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
-----
Order No.02/Dated: 08.09.2026
I.A. No.11144 of 2026
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.
1. Heard Mr. S. S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P.
2. This application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning the delay of 19 days in filing the appeal.
3. Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed and the delay of 19 days in filing the appeal, is hereby, condoned.
4. I.A. No.11144 of 2026 stands disposed of.
Cr. Appeal (D.B) No.1044 of 2026
5. This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.06.2026 passed in B.P. No. 283 of 2026 arising out of Belbadda P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026 by the learned
Sessions Judge, Godda, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
6. It has been alleged that the appellant and other accused persons were apprehended by the police and on their pointing out arms and ammunitions and live bombs were recovered.
7. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant was picked up by the police on 13.04.2026 and when a complaint was made to the Magistrate, a report was submitted that the appellant has been remanded on 17.04.2026.
8. Learned Counsel submits that the appellant was kept in illegal detention by the police for four days. It has further been submitted that the appellant is in custody since 17.04.2026 and the allegations are general and omnibus in nature against all the accused persons including the appellant with respect to the recovery of arms and ammunitions and bombs.
9. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and has submitted that the appellant has got criminal antecedent.
10. Regard being had to period of custody undergone by the appellant and submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, we while setting aside the order dated 08.06.2026 passed in B.P. No. 283 of 2026 arising out of Belbadda P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026 by the learned Sessions Judge, Godda direct that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Godda.
11. This appeal is allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.) 08th September, 2026 R.K/Rajnish Uploaded on