2026:JHHC:19056 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4151 of 2026 Mukesh Kumar Mehta, aged about 31 years, S/o Late Harihar Mahto, R/o Village – Bandarbela, PO- Barhi, PS- Padma O.P., Barhi, District- Hazaribag. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, APP 05/30.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2025 in connection with S. T. Case No.80 of 2026 arising out of Barhi (Padma O.P.) P. S. Case No.384 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.2741 of 2025 for the offences registered under Sections 103 (1) / 238, 61 (2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and the case is pending in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge VI, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2025 and it is alleged that he had murdered his wife while she was going in Motorcycle and it is further alleged that he had used helmet as a weapon to inflict head injury upon his wife. 4. Learned counsel further submits that it has come during investigation that petitioner as well as the victim (wife) were going by Motorcycle and they met with an accident and both of them suffered injury and both of them have been admitted in the Hospital for treatment but the victim died. . It is a case of accidental death of the victim who has suffered head injury during accident and the petitioner has also suffered injury. Further, the charge has already been framed. 5. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer and submitted that it was a planned manner in which the wife of the petitioner has been killed. It has been also submitted that the petitioner has killed his wife on account of the fact that just two months before the accident, petitioner has got one LIC policy of Rs.30 Lakhs in the name of his wife. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has also opposed the prayer. 2026:JHHC:19056 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner and his wife had gone out in a motorcycle and wife died due to head injury. Further it has come during investigation in Para-21 of the case diary that witnesses have stated that the petitioner and his wife had suffered accident and the wife has died but the petitioner was live and they were taken to the Hospital. 8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances it appears that the petitioner and his wife met with an accident and the petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2025, the petitioner above named is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions Judge VI, Hazaribagh, in connection with S. T. Case No.80 of 2026 arising out of Barhii (Padma O.P.) P. S. Case No.384 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.2741 of 2025 on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 9. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 10. Let this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 30.06.2026 Uploaded sandeep/