( 2026:JHHC:18437 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5688 of 2026 ------ 1. Gayatri Kumari Prasad @ Gayatri Devi, aged about 58 years, wife of Radheshyam Das, residing at 1 Bajrang Nagar, Kashi Bazar, Ratanpura, P.O.-Chapra, P.S.-Chapra, Dist.-Saran/Bihar 2. Dolly Kumari @ Dolly Devi, aged about 45 years, wife of Bharat Kumar Das, resident of Tata Road, Near Magistrate Colony, Chaibasa, P.O.-Chaibasa, P.S.-Sadar, Chaibasa, Dist.-Singhbhum West/Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate : Ms. Nutan Kri. Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 (G.R. No.253 of 2024) registered for the offences punishable under sections 341/323/325/427/504/506/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons has committed the murder of Binod Kumar Das by strangulating him. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that initially the case was instituted involving bailable offences only and the petitioners were granted bail but during the course of treatment, as the alleged victim Binod Kumar Das died on 10.07.2023 though the alleged occurrence is of 19.06.2023, charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner inter alia for having committed the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is then submitted that there is no specific role attributed to the petitioners and the petitioners are females. It is further submitted that they have not misused the bail granted to them after the occurrence before cancellation of their bail vide order dated 03.09.2024. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.23 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 01.06.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not 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 admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in connection with Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 (G.R. No.253 of 2024) with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 24.06.2026 Gunjan-