2026:JHHC:20307 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5890 of 2026 1. Talo Marandi, Son of Ketka @ Ledma Marandi 2. Rakesh Marandi @ Ramlal Marandi, Son of Ketka @ Ledma Marandi … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioners : Ms. Saman Ahmad, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Sweta Singh, Advocate --- 03/9th July 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. Case No. 02 of 2026 arising out of Devipur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 103(1), 238(a) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch Craft Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX-cum-Special Judge, Crime Against Women, Deoghar. 2. In spite of order dated 30.06.2026, no counter-affidavit has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are named in the FIR, but there is general allegation along with other accused. She has also submitted that the other co-accused, who are similarly situated as that of the petitioners, have been enlarged on bail, namely, Lalita Tudu and Manodi Besra, who are the wives of the present petitioners. The learned counsel has further submitted that the charge has been framed on 02.02.2026 and one witness has been examined. The petitioners are in custody since 15.09.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has referred to the case-diary to submit that during investigation, it has 2026:JHHC:20307 2 come that it were these two petitioners, who had slit the throat of the victim and the allegations are of serious nature and the murder weapon has been recovered from the house of the petitioner no. 2. Both the petitioners have also confessed their guilt. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials collected during investigation and the seriousness of offence involved in this case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 6. So far as the bail granted to the two co-accused, namely, Lalita Tudu and Manodi Besra, are concerned, they are ladies and happens to be the wife of the present petitioners and their case stands on different footing as that of the petitioners. The trial has already commenced. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, it would be suffice to direct the State to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court. 8. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of 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 ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 09.07.2026 Uploaded On: 11.07.2026 Mukul/-