2026:JHHC:22245 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5151 of 2026 Sanjay Kumar Saw, Son of Hiralal Saw … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathy, Senior Advocate : Ms. Nutan Kumari Sharma, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, APP --- 03/28.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 744 of 2025 arising out of Mahuda P.S. Case No. 70 of 2025, registered under Section 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge at Dhanbad. 3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier permitted to be withdrawn vide order dated 27.11.2025 passed in B.A. No. 8694 of 2025. 4. He submits that the petitioner and the deceased were said to be in contact with each other through Facebook and the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report. 5. He submits that one dead body of a lady was recovered by the villagers where her head was found crushed and after few days, the son of the deceased lodged an FIR that his mother was missing. The learned Senior counsel submits that only on account of suspicion, the petitioner has been made an accused in this case and even the seizure has not been done as per the provision of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, although there is an allegation that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner, certain recoveries were made. 6. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the seizure witnesses have not fully supported the prosecution 2026:JHHC:22245 2 case. However, they have not turned hostile. 7. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there are enough materials against the petitioner and the personal belongings of the deceased were also recovered at the instance of the petitioner. He submits that at the instance of the petitioner, the Aadhar card, purse, Mobile, saree and dupatta were also recovered. He submits in paragraph 108 of the case-diary, it has been mentioned that as per tower location, the petitioner had made call from his mobile to the deceased 120 times since 01.05.2025 to 28.05.2025. 8. The learned counsel for the State has also submitted that the trial is at advanced stage. 9. To this, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that out of 10 charge-sheeted witnesses, 05 witnesses have been examined, but the chain of circumstances is yet to be proved which is apparent from the impugned order dated 13.04.2026 passed by the learned court. 10. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the materials collected during investigation as indicated in the counter-affidavit and also the fact that the trial is in advanced stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 11. However, the State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court. 12. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution and Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance. 13. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:28.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:29.07.2026