Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:20716 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2418 of 2025 ------- Sourabh Baranwal @ B. Sourabh @ Mannu, aged about 30 years, son of Vijoy Baranwal, resident of Loharkulhi, P.O. & P.S. Seraidhela, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand). …... …. Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. …. Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH -------- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, A.P. P. For the Informant : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate -------- 04/ Dated 25.07.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No. 51 of 2023, corresponding to G.R. Case No.2483 of 2023, now converted into Sessions Trial No.844 of 2024, for the offence registered under Sections 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad. Bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide B.A. No. 5002 of 2024, by order dated 20.09.2024, with the direction to the learned Trial Court to expedite the trial. Petitioner Sourabh Baranwal @ B. Sourabh @ Mannu is the husband of the deceased Surbhi Singh, who died due to asphyxia because of hanging in her matrimonial home within seven years of her marriage. There is allegation that the deceased was tortured to enforce the demand of dowry. It appears that apart from the ligature mark, two mechanical injuries – one below her chin and the other over the upper back side of her right leg were found. While dismissing the bail application of the petitioner earlier, this Court had called for a report from the learned Trial Court regarding the stage of the case and the time required for its conclusion. Learned Trial Court had reported that out of 14 witnesses, 07 witnesses have already been examined and the trial is likely to be concluded within six months. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the report of the learned Trial Court, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected and the learned Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial. -2- Subsequently, petitioner moved before the Hon’ble Apex Court for grant of bail in S.L.A. No.15831/2024 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed of his bail application, on the ground that out of 14 witnesses, seven witnesses have been examined. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also directed the Trial Court to dispose of the case within the stipulated period. The Hon’ble Supreme Court gave liberty to the petitioner to revive his request for grant of bail in case of a change in circumstances or if the trial gets prolonged due to non-appearance of the witnesses. Thereafter, fresh report was called for regarding the stage of the case and it appears that after recording the evidences of the prosecution witnesses and the defence witnesses, the case is running at the stage of argument and part argument has also been heard on behalf of accused persons and the case is likely to be disposed in the month of August, 2025. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the trial is likely to be concluded in the month of August, 2025 itself, I am not inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Ambuj Nath, J.) BS/-