Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12442 (JHR)

JAGDISH SINKU v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./4095/2026 · 2026-05-14

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(2026:JHHC:14883) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 4095 of 2026 Jagdish Sinku, aged about 28 years, s/o Roya Sinku, resident of village – Nangra, PO – Jamdih, PS – Tonto, District – West Singhbhum. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhasker Trivedi, Advocate : Ms. Shipra Sonam, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay, Addl. P.P ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 14th May, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 40 of 2024, G.R. Case No. 41 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 51 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1) and 238 of the B.N.S. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of Gono Sinku. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion. It is then submitted that so far three witnesses have been examined during trial of the case, the copy of deposition of which has kept at page no. 20 to 27. It is further submitted that none of the three witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and all of them have been declared hostile. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 17 of the bail application. and the petitioner has been in custody since 11.12.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge – III, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 40 of 2024, G.R. Case No. 41 of 2025 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 51 of 2025, with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated – 14.05.2026 Aditi