Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15904 (JHR)

BINOD SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./4304/2026 · 2026-06-09

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:16502] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4304 of 2026 ------ Binod Singh, aged about 47 years, Son of Late Bipat Singh, Resident of Village- Birhori Tola, P.O. & P.S.- Manika, District- Latehar (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurav Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-09-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No. 290 of 2025 arising out of Manika P.S. Case No.89 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of Rajnath Singh as he was protesting illicit relationship of the petitioner with the wife of the deceased. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion and except suspicion, there is no other material available in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is also submitted that charge has already been framed on 21.01.2026 but no witness has been examined till toaday. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.09.2025 as mentioned in para-14 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar in connection with S.T. Case No. 290 of 2025 arising out of Manika P.S. Case No.89 of 2025 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 09.06.2026 Saroj/