Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18174 (JHR)

VINOKH SINGH ALIAS VINOK SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5826/2025 · 2025-07-14

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:19065 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5826 of 2025 ------ 1. Vinokh Singh @ Vinok Singh, aged about 40 years, 2. Kamlesh Singh, aged about 35 years, 3. Akhilesh Singh, aged about 30 years 4. Amresh Singh, aged about 25 years All son of Devki Singh, r/o Village-Goa, P.O.-Latehar, P.S.- Latehar, Dist.-Latehar … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rahul, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 14.07.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No.51 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons committed murder of thief of goat. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.13 of the bail application and they have been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion but without any motive to kill the deceased. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 10.03.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Latehar, in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No.51 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/