SURYADEO CHAUDHARY vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - V.S.SAHAY — B.A./4949/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 103(1),352,351(2),3(5),BNS,27(3),ARMS,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 04th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010177842026

Filing Number

B.A./11475/2026

Filing Date

25-May-2026

Registration No

B.A./4949/2026

Registration Date

01-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Coram

Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ARMS & EXPLOSIVES ( 104 )

Sub-Category

Arms Act,1959 ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

04-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 103(1),352,351(2),3(5),BNS,27(3),ARMS,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURYADEO CHAUDHARY

    Adv. ABHAY KR CHATURVEDY,RAJESH KR SINGH,RAJESH KR SINGH, ,CHANDAN KUMAR,RAJESH KR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - V.S.SAHAY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon MukhopadhyayView PDF

    The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to Suryadeo Chaudhary, accused in a firing case, finding insufficient specific evidence against him since investigation revealed the actual shooters were Vijay Singh and Jethu Singh. The court released him on a Rs. 10,000 bail bond with two sureties of equal amount, noting the likely false implication stemmed from an underlying land dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Jun-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay

  4. 25-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./4949/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to Suryadeo Chaudhary, accused in a firing case, finding insufficient specific evidence against him since investigation revealed the actual shooters were Vijay Singh and Jethu Singh. The court released him on a Rs. 10,000 bail bond with two sureties of equal amount, noting the likely false implication stemmed from an underlying land dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case