2026:JHHC:18361 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5388 of 2026 Asan Mirdaha @ Chotu, aged about 25 years, S/o- Jahir Mirdaha … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Achinto Sen, Advocate --- 04/23.06.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2023 in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No. 412 of 2023 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 86 of 2024 and G.R. Case No. 134 of 2024, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 376A, 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge, Gumla. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on merit earlier, but the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail in view of the fact that the only witness, who is remaining to be examined i.e. a doctor, is not appearing before the court and the petitioner is languishing in the jail. She has also submitted that even on 15.10.2025 when the bail application as lastly rejected, the status of the trial was the same. She has submitted that the next date in the trial is 10.07.2026. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court is of the view that there can be no reason for non-production of witness and it appears from the records that the sole witness, who is remained to be 2026:JHHC:18361 2 examined i.e. a doctor, is not being produced before the court. However, since the trial is at fag end, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. The instant bail application is hereby rejected. 7. The State is directed to ensure that the remaining witness be produced on the date as fixed by the learned trial court or on the next date. 8. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance. 9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 23.06.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-25.06.2026