2026:JHHC:3102 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8537 of 2025 ------ Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Patel, son of Gopi Chudhir, resident of village Arangi, Ward No. 5, P.O. and P.S. Kharondhi, District Sahibganj .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, A.P.P. ------ Order No.06 / Dated : 05.02.2026 Bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner- Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Patel, who is in custody since 17.03.2025 in connection with Kharaundhi P.S. Case No. 01 of 2025 for the offences registered under Sections 332(a), 118(2), 103(1) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Garhwa, is pressed into motion. Petitioner is named in the FIR and there is direct and specific allegation against him that he entered into the house of the deceased and inflicted fatal knife injury to the victim lady, who died during course of her treatment. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of petitioner that there is no eye witness to the incidence and he has been roped into the case only on suspicion. The incidence took place on 14.11.2024 and after long treatment, she died on 28.12.2024 and thereafter, the FIR was lodged. Her dying declaration was not recorded during this period. Petitioner has been implicated in this case for the reason that earlier he was in love affair therefore, eloped with the deceased for which a Panchayti was held and he was warned not to get in touch with the deceased. Learned A.P.P. opposed the bail petition. It is submitted that deaf and dumb daughter of the deceased aged about 12 years, was an eye witness to the incidence and by writing the name of this petitioner, she had named him. Further, there are call detail report which also shows that he had been regularly calling the deceased. Deceased after the incidence was unconscious and therefore was not in position to give her statement. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit Uploaded 06.02.2026