Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16308 (JHR)

PINTU YADAV ALIAS RAJ KUMAR YADAV ALIAS RAJKUMAR YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./4770/2025 · 2025-06-18

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:16035] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4770 of 2025 ------ Pintu Yadav @ Raj Kumar Yadav @ Rajkumar Yadav, aged about 30 years, son of Kameshwar Yadav, Resident of village Paradih, P.O. and P.S. – Chatra, District- Chatra. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Bandana Sinha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18-06-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection Sadar (Chatra) P.S. Case No.273 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 80, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, in furtherance of common intention with the co- accused persons, has committed the dowry death of Mouri Devi. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-12 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is next submitted that there is no material in the record to suggest that the deceased died otherwise than under normal circumstances; rather the post-mortem report shows that the deceased died because of failure of heart and lungs, but the doctor who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased has not furnished any opinion regarding the cause of the death and reserved the same till receipt of the report of some expert. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.02.2025 as is evident from para-13 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Chatra in connection with Sadar (Chatra) P.S. Case No.273 of 2024 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/