2026:JHHC:8187 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11777 of 2025 Lakhan Nayak, aged about 25 years, S/o Jageshwar Nayak, R/o Village – Birhorabera, P.O. & P.S. – Petarwar, District – Bokaro, Jharkhand. ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioner : Dr. (Mrs.) Vandana Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate. Mr. Suman Kumar Ghosh, Advocate. Mr. Aditya Banerjee, Advocate. --------- Order No. 04/Dated: 23rd March, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Peterwar P.S. Case No. 60 of 2025 (S.T. No. 269 of 2025), registered for the offence under Sections 103 (1) & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of himself and other co-accused persons. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged occurrence. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 01.05.2025. Other co-accused namely, Lenin Raja Nayak @ Lenin Raj has been granted bail by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide B.A. No. 7349 of 2025 dated 14.10.2025. The case of the petitioner stands on similar footing. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail. 4. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has submitted that the role of present petitioner stands on different footing as he was main assailant and clearly disclosed in 2026:JHHC:8187 his confessional statement that he has given indiscriminate assault by axe on head and different parts of the body of the deceased. He has also admitted that the axe was stick on the head of the deceased and seeing that he along with other co-accused fled away. It is further submitted that blood stained axe was also recovered and seized during investigation, therefore, there is truth in the confessional statement of accused and his involvement is well-settled. It is very serious and heinous offence, therefore, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. 5. It appears that the manner of occurrence as disclosed by the co- accused Lenin Raj Nayak @ Lenin Raj, who was first apprehended in this case and subsequently by the present petitioner, the role of present petitioner is indiscriminating assault by tangi also found corroboration from the P.M. report of the deceased, wherein 10 incised wounds on different parts of the body of the deceased has been found. The axe has also been seized during investigation, which was used in commission of murder. 6. In view of the aforesaid, I find that the case of the petitioner is not identical with the co-accused Lenin Raj Nayak @ Lenin Raj, who has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 7. Considering the fact that there is serious and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I do not feel inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) March 23, 2026 Sunil/ Uploaded on 25/03/2026