[2025:JHHC:18687] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5677 of 2025 ------ Sandeep Kumar Thakur, aged about 28 years, S/o Kameshwar Thakur, R/o- Village- Kashidh, P.O. & P.S.- Sakchi, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kr. Trivedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vijoy Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-10-07-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No.25 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.558 of 2025 (S.T. Case No.174 of 2025) registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of his wife because of non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that as per the post-mortem report, cause of death is asphyxia because of hanging and it is a clear case of suicide; because of the petitioner did not agree to the proposal of the deceased to live separately from his family members. It is then submitted that the petitioner voluntarily surrendered in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 21.02.2025 as is evident from para-29 of the instant bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that since there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the co-accused persons of making dowry demand of T.V. and micro oven and the deceased died within a period of seven years of her marriage otherwise than under normal circumstances, hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/