Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20167 (JHR)

SHIVDHAN LOHAR v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5816/2026 · 2026-07-13

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:20689] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5816 of 2026 ------ Shivdhan Lohar, aged about 38 years, S/o Chhotu Lohar, R/o- Village – Masania, P.S. & P.O- Kathikund, District- Dumka, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Juhi Kumari, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated-13-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kathikund P.S. Case No.14 of 2022 corresponding to S.T. Case No.218 of 2022 registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of his own wife by assaulting her with an iron-rod because of quarrel between them. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner does not know as to how many witnesses have been examined during the trial. It is also submitted that charge has been framed on 17.01.2023. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2022. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct nature of serious allegation against the petitioner of having committed the murder of his own wife, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-13.07.2026-Animesh/