Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20157 (JHR)

ANITA DEVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./6474/2026 · 2026-07-13

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:20704 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6474 of 2026 ------ Anita Devi, W/o Amit Mehta alias Dharmendra Mehta, aged about 28 years, resident of Vill.-Madhupur, P.O.-Pipra Begahi, P.S.- Kutumba, District-Aurangabad, Bihar. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anand Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 13-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Chhatarpur P.S. Case No.141 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons has committed murder of Mrityunjay Sah as the deceased was having illicit relationship with the petitioner. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is also submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted in this case, but no witness has been examined as yet. It is further submitted that except confessional statement of her husband, there is no other material to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –13 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no.01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that she 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 above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Chhatarpur P.S. Case No.141 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish her mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that she will not change her mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that she will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 13/07/2026 Abhiraj/