Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13453 (JHR)

ROHIT KUMAR ALIAS ROHIT MAHTHA v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.Rev./292/2026 · 2026-05-06

Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:13550 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 292 of 2026 Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Mahtha represented through his natural Guardian mother Rekha Devi … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Adv. For the State : A.P.P. ---------- 03/06.05.2026 Heard Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. This application is directed against the judgment dated 15.12.2025 passed in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 36/2025, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Children Court Deoghar, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 01.12.2025 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Town P.S. Case No. 314 of 2025, rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been affirmed. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 17.07.2025. It has further been submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner is of the deceased being last seen with the petitioner and other accused persons on several motorcycles. Learned counsel further submits that admittedly there are no eye-witnesses to the occurrence and only on the basis of circumstantial evidence emanating from the deceased being last seen with the petitioner his prayer for bail has been rejected. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. It appears from the impugned judgment dated 15.12.2025 that as per the CCTV footage which finds mention at paragraph 26 of the case diary the deceased was last seen with the petitioner on the same motorcycle. Moreover, it appears that the dead body of the deceased was recovered in close proximity to he being last seen with the petitioner. On consideration of the fact that there are strong circumstances emanating from the above, I am not inclined to entertain this application which accordingly stands dismissed at this stage. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Dated, the 6th May, 2026 A. Sanga/- Uploaded on 08 /05/2026 -2-