Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17473 (JHR)

SANICHAR MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5576/2026 · 2026-06-22

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(2026:JHHC:18088) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 5576 of 2026 Sanichar Mahto, aged about 62 years, son of Jungli Mahto, resident of village – Shankardih, PO & PS – Nimiyaghat, District – Giridih, Jharkhand. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Azeemuddin, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 22nd June, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 187 of 2023 arising out of Nimiaghat P.S. Case No. 50 of 1998, registered for the offences punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person – being his wife, has committed murder of Lohani Devi. It is next submitted that the eye-witnesses examined in this case it supported the case of the prosecution but there are contradictions in their testimony and the petitioner has been in custody for a considerable period of time, hence, the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the direct nature of serious allegation against the petitioner which is also corroborated by the witness of the prosecution so far examined, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the prayer for bail of the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated – 22.06.2026 Aditi