Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20670 (JHR)

NITU DEVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./6620/2026 · 2026-07-18

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:21283 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6620 of 2026 ------ Nitu Devi, Aged about 29 Years, W/o –Late Vijay Lohra, Resident of village –Husir, P.O. –Husir, P.S. –Kanke, District – Ranchi (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate : Ms. Shipra Sonam, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18.07.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 388 of 2026 arising out of Angara P.S. Case No.18 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103, 61(2), 238, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of her husband –Vijay Lohra only because she was in love with Guljar Ansari. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and except suspicion, 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 20.05.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. It is then submitted that though charge sheet has been submitted and charge has been framed but no witness has been examined so far. 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 AJC-XIII-cum-Special Judge-III, CBI (Other than AHD), Ranchi, in connection with S.T. Case No. 388 of 2026 arising out of Angara P.S. Case No.18 of 2026 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.) 18.07.2026 Sonu/