Prem Kumar Karmali @ Prem Karmali vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1541 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Prem Kumar Karmali @ Prem Karmali vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 26 February, 2026

                                                               2026:JHHC:5843




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             B.A. No.803 of 2026

    Prem Kumar Karmali @ Prem Karmali, aged about 19 years, S/o.
    Dilip Karmali, R/o. Vill.- Dungigachi, P.O. & P.S. Gola, Dist.-
    Ramgarh, Jharkhand.                       ...    Petitioner
                                Versus
    The State of Jharkhand             ...      Opposite Party

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

    For the Petitioner         : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
                               : Mr. Sahadeo Choudhary, Adv.
                               : Ms. Rashmi Mehta, Adv.
    For the State              : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, APP

 Order No.02/Dated- 26.02.2026
          Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.

    2.    The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Gola

    P.S. Case No.100 of 2025, registered for offences punishable under

    Section 317(4), 317(5), 111(2)b, 111(4) & 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 which is

    pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ramgarh.

    3.    It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

    petitioner is innocent and he was arrested from his house and he has

    been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that recovery

    of stolen motorcycle has been attributed to him on the basis of is

    confessional statement. It is also submitted that there is general and

    omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner undertakes to

    cooperate in the trial of the case and abide by all terms and conditions

    which may be imposed. Hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail.

    5.    Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner

    and has submitted that petitioner is involved in five cases of similar

    nature and also on the basis of disclosure of the present petitioner,




                                                                      1|Page
                                                            2026:JHHC:5843




seven stolen motorcycles and one car were recovered. Therefore, he

does not deserve bail.

6.     Considering the fact that the petitioner is involved in five case of

same nature and the recovery of several stolen motorcycles and a car on

the basis of his confessional statement, there is likelihood of

involvement in further criminal activities, I do not find substance in the

contentions raised on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, the prayer for bail

of the petitioner is rejected.



                                 (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)


26.02.2026

Rahul Uploaded on 27/02/2026

2|Page