Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18327 (JHR)

SURESH CHANDRA MURMU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5860/2026 · 2026-06-30

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:19071 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5860 of 2026 Suresh Chandra Murmu, aged about 65 years, Son of Late- Ghasiram Murmu … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr.Amit Kumar Choubey, Advocate For the State : None --- 02/30.06.2026 Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party-State. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 22.03.2025 in connection with Raj NagarP.S. Case No. 22 of 2025, corresponding to POCSO Case No. 09 of 2025 for the offences registered under Sections 65 and 351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 4 of POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Seraikella. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court on 07.10.2025 in B.A. No. 5498 of 2025 and now the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail and the petitioner is in custody since 22.03.3025 and is aged about 65 years. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and upon going through the impugned order dated 24.03.2026, it appears that there are altogether 13 witnesses in the chargesheet and 9 witnesses have already been examined, this Court finds that there is serous allegation against the petitioner and the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merits and the petitioner was tutor of the victim who is alleged to have raped the victim. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected. 5. However, the State is directed to ensure the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the trial Court. 2026:JHHC:19071 2 6. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to the director prosecution. 7. Let this order be communicated to the concerned court through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 30.06.2026 Uploaded on 01.07.2026 Pramanik/