Sudama Yadav @ Sudama Prasad Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 3054 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sudama Yadav @ Sudama Prasad Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 April, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Cr. A. (DB) No. 76 of 2026
                                  --------

Sudama Yadav @ Sudama Prasad Yadav, aged about 54 years, son of Sitaram Yadav, resident of Village-Sanani, P.O.-Kusho, P.S.-Kandi, District-Garhwa ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Respondent

--------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

--------

For the Appellant : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.P.P.

--------

Order No. 03/ Dated: 15th April, 2026

I.A. No. 5091 of 2026

Heard Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel for the appellant and

learned Spl.P.P.

2. This application has been preferred by the appellant for grant of

bail to him, during the pendency of this appeal.

3. The appellant has been convicted for the offences under Section

147, 148, 324, 304(II)/149 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of the

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along

with fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the

S.C./S.T. Act.

4. It has been alleged that while the informant and other members of

his family were working in a field for planting paddy, the accused

persons including the appellant had reached with arms and assaulted

them, as a result of which, Awadhesh Ram had succumbed to his

injuries.

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that though in the first information report it has been mentioned about the

appellant and Karamdeo Yadav as the persons who had assaulted

Awadhesh Ram but in the evidence of P.W.-1 who is also an eye-witness

it seems to suggest that Karamdeo Yadav and Rinku Yadav were the

main assailants. Learned counsel submits that Rinku Yadav has been

granted bail by this Court in Cr. A. (DB) No. 98 of 2026. It has further

been submitted that the allegations against the appellant are general and

omnibus in nature.

6. Learned Spl.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

7. Regard being had to the fact that some of the co-convicts have

been granted bail including Rinku Yadav who appears to be main

assailant, we are inclined to admit the appellant on bail. Accordingly,

during the pendency of this appeal, appellant above named, is directed to

be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction

of learned Special Judge SC/ST Cases-cum-ADJ-I-cum-Special Judge

POCSO-cum-FTC (CAW), Garhwa in connection with SC/ST Case No.

12 of 2022, arising out of Kandi P.S. Case No. 61 of 2016.

8. The aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 15.04.2026 Arpit Uploaded on 17/04/2026