Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34552 (JHR)

RANVIJAY SINGH v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./9337/2025 · 2025-10-17

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:32270] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.9337 of 2025 ------ Ranvijay Singh, Aged about 30 Years, S/o- Rajpal, R/o- Alladih, Near Post Office Babudeopur, Jemari behind Promila Nursury Alladih, P.O. & P.S.- Salanpur, District- Paschim Burdwan (W.B). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Pd. Joshi, Advocate Mr. Kumar Rahul, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated-17-10-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mihijam P.S. Case No.10 of 2025 (S.T. Case No.72 of 2025) registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27, 25(1-b), 26/35 of the Arms Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with a prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 passed in B.A. No.5779 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meanwhile, four witnesses including the daughter in law of the informant- who is the wife of the deceased as well as the informant has been examined in this case. It is next submitted that daughter in law of the informant has categorically stated in para-22 of her deposition that she cannot say who killed her husband and how her husband died. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 01.02.2025 as is evident from para-1 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Jamtara in connection with Mihijam P.S. Case No.10 of 2025 (S.T. Case No.72 of 2025) with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:-17.10.2025 Saroj/