Birendra Prasad @Biru vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 1606 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Birendra Prasad @Biru vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party on 27 February, 2026

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                                      [2026:JHHC:5929]
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                B.A. no. 1608 of 2026

                   Birendra Prasad @Biru, aged about 41 years, Son Of Late Badri
                   Prasad, Permanent Resident of Village- Ganaura, P.O. & P.S.-
                   Amamaura, District-Chapra, Bihar. Present Resident of Plot
                   No.135 B, Bharat Ekta Co-Operative Society, Bandhgora, P.O.-
                   Bokaro Steel City, P.S.- Sector-XII, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand.
                                                                 ... Petitioner
                                            Versus

                  The State of Jharkhand                        ...      Opp. party


        Coram:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

                  For the Petitioner     : Mr. Girish Mohan Singh , Adv.
                  For the State         : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan , Addl. PP




02 / 27.02.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sector XII P. S. case no. 84 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No.985 of 2024 (S.T. No.90/2025 ) instituted involving the offences punishable under Section u/s 111, 274, 275, 292 Of B.N.S., u/s 25(1-A)/25(1B)(a)/ 25(6)/35/26 of Arms Act, 1959 & 47(a) of Excise Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail as his earlier bail application was rejected vide order dated 26.09.2025 passed in B.A. no. 8790 of 2025. It is next submitted that the fresh ground is that the petitioner has been in custody for a considerable period of time and also, the earlier counsel could not place certain relevant facts. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit and there is no fresh ground; therefore the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and since the prayer of regular bail of the petitioner has already been rejected earlier on merit and in the in the absence of any cogent fresh ground and only because the petitioner has remained in jail custody for over three months, this court is of the considered view that the same not by itself a sufficient ground to review the order of rejection 26.09.2025 passed in B.A. no. 8790 of 2025.

Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is again rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in earlier order of rejection 26.09.2025 passed in B.A. no. 8790 of 2025.

(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Dated 27.02.2026 Smita/-