2026:JHHC:22241 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5191 of 2026 Sohan Yadav @ Sohan Kumar @ Sonam Kumar, son of Raj Kumar Yadav … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Sushma Aind, APP --- 03/28.07.2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.04.2026 in connection with Jama P.S. Case No.14 of 2026, registered under Sections 108, 3 (5) of B.N.S, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Dumka. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the F.I.R itself, the deceased wanted to marry the petitioner. However, she was married to another person in the year 2025. Subsequently, she also wanted to marry the petitioner and in the F.I.R, it has been alleged that the deceased went to the house of the petitioner, where they established physical relationship and insisted that the petitioner should marry her. Thereafter, the deceased committed suicide. It is submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 108/351(3) and 69 of BNS and that the petitioner is in custody since 10.04.2026. 4. The learned counsel submits that there was no question of any marriage with a lady, who was already married and the deceased used to live in the house of her parents. It appears that there was love affair between the petitioner and the victim, but she got married to somebody else and ultimately, she committed suicide. 5. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is allegation that the petitioner established physical relationship with the deceased even after marriage, and therefore, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. 2026:JHHC:22241 2 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the sequence of events as mentioned in the F.I.R itself, it appears that the deceased was already married in the year 2025, but she throughout wanted to marry the petitioner, and thereafter, she went to the house of the petitioner where they established physical relationship and ultimately committed suicide. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, particularly considering that the deceased was already married, and therefore, there was no question of the petitioner marrying a married woman, and further that the charge sheet has already been submitted, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Dumka in connection with Jama P.S. Case No.14 of 2026, on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court. 8. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 9. 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 Saurav/- Date of Uploading:29.07.2026