Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14976 (JHR)

SHADIQUE AHMAD @ SADIQ AHMED v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./495/2026 · 2026-03-26

Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:8667 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 495 of 2026 ------ Shadique Ahmad @ Sadiq Ahmed .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Kaif Khan .... .... .... Opp. Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Ms. Talat Parveen, Advocate ------ Order No. 03 / Dated : 26.03.2026 Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P assisted by Ms. Talat Parveen, learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Topchanchi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. It has been alleged that the sister of the informant had committed suicide at her parental place. Submission has been advanced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the suicide note indicates that it was the parents of the petitioner, who were primarily responsible for the deceased committing suicide. It has been submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2025. Learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the petitioner was the main person, who was responsible for the act of the deceased in committing suicide. The suicide note finds reflection in para 08 of the case diary from which it appears that though in the first part, allegation has been levelled against the parents of the petitioner with respect to commission of torture on her, but so far as the concluding part is concerned, it seems that the petitioner was also responsible similarly with his parents in inducing the deceased to commit suicide. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is hereby rejected at this stage. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Anit Uploaded 28.03.2026