ARVIND BHUIAN ALIAS ARVIND KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./3458/2025 · 2025-04-30
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 31004 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 31004 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:JHHC:12969] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.3458 of 2025
------ Arvind Bhuian @ Arvind Kumar, aged about 19 years, S/o Krit Bhuiyan, Resident of – Kisaini P.S.- Patan P.O.- Patan, District- Palamau (Jharkhand)
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurav Mahto, Advocate
For the State
: Mrs. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 30-04-2025
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Patan P.S. Case No.27 of 2024 (S.T. Case No.284 of 2024) registered under Section 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
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 murder of Reshmi Kumari and caused disappearance of the evidence of murder. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that though charge has been framed but the petitioner is unaware as to how many witnesses have been examined in the trial and what have they stated about the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 26.03.2023. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the overwhelming evidence against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage.
Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner
be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/