Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18541 (JHR)

SAHABU ANSARI v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5821/2025 · 2025-07-14

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:19061 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5821 of 2025 ------ Sahabu Ansari, aged about 40 years, son of late Jamal Ansari, resident of Mohalla-Kund Mohalla, P.O. & P.S.-Daltonganj, Dist.-Palamau … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. No.2, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 14.07.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No.327 of 2024 (G.R. No. 593 of 2025) registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/61 of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of his wife. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.01.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 12 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the brutal nature of murder committed by the petitioner of his own wife, only because his wife was not parting with her property, there is every chance of the petitioner tampering with evidence and absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/