Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1583 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 27 February, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                       ( 2026:JHHC:5857 )




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             B.A. No. 403 of 2026

            Rajesh Kumar Gupta, aged about 42 years, Son of Late Hiralal Gupta,
            Resident of Village- Baliapatra, P.O. + P.S.- Maheshpur, District- Pakur,
            Jharkhand.                                     ...     Petitioner
                                      Versus
            The State of Jharkhand                           ... Opposite Party
                                      ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. S.K. Srivastava, A.P.P.

---

06/27.02.2026 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr. S.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party- State of Jharkhand.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2025 in connection with Jama P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025, registered under Sections 317(4)/317(5)/3(5) of B.N.S, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dumka.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is a named accused in the case and there is allegation against the petitioner that he, with his associates, was involved in committing theft of motorcycles from different places. One motorcycle has also been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and numerous motorcycles have been recovered from the possession of other co- accused. The petitioner also has a criminal antecedent.

5. The counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner has entered into a compromise with the victim and therefore he may be released on bail.

6. Considering the recovery of stolen motorcycle from the possession of the petitioner and that the petitioner also has a criminal antecedent, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected.

7. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses.

8. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police

( 2026:JHHC:5857 )

of the concerned district.

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through "FAX/email".

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:27.02.2026 Vedanti Date of Uploading: 27.02.2026