Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2690 (JHR)

KANHAI MAHATO ALIAS KANHAI MAHTO ALIAS KANHAIY MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./458/2025 · 2025-02-19

Rajesh Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.458 of 2025 ---- Kanhai Mahato @ Kanhai Mahto @ Kanhaiy Mahto, aged about 40 years, S/o. Madan Mahato @ Madan Mahto, R/o Virajpur, P.O. & P.S. Madhuban, Dist. Dhanbad …. …. Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P. ---- 04/Dated: 19th February, 2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the State. 2. The applicant, who is in custody since 13.10.2022, has renewed the prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T No.354 of 2023, arising out Barora P.S. Case No.66 of 2022, corresponding to G.R No.112 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad. 3. This applicant has been made an accused for committing the offence under Sections 341/324/326/307/504/506/34 of the I.P.C and Sections 27(1)/27(2) of the Arms Act. 4. Earlier, the bail applications of this applicant were rejected vide orders dated 02.05.2023, 25.08.2023& 14.05.2024, passed in B.A. No.3100 of 2023, B.A No.7436 of 2023 & B.A No.865 of 2024 respectively. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant(s) that complete set of FIR along with its enclosure have been annexed with this bail application and there is no suppression on his/her part. Innocence has been claimed by the learned counsel for the applicant and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been renewed. 6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. 7. From perusal of the status report submitted by the Trial Court, it appears that the informant and other witnesses have already been examined and now the case is pending for defence evidence. 8. Considering the stage of the trial, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the applicant. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant stands rejected once again ‘at this stage’. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Raja/-Uploaded