2026:JHHC:22600 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5385 of 2026 Viksal Marki, S/o Late Asian Marki … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party With B.A. No. 5876 of 2026 Jaipal Marki, S/o Late Sujan Marki … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Juhi Kumari, Advocate [in both the cases] For the Opp. Party : Ms. Shweta Singh, APP [in B.A. No. 5385 of 2026] : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, APP [in B.A. No. 5876 of 2026] --- 06/30.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 13 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 73 of 2024, registered under Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Simdega. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are not named in the First Information Report and have no criminal antecedent. She submits that there is delay of 5 days in lodging the FIR and the name of the petitioners has come up during their confessional statement. She submits that there is nothing against the petitioners to connect them with the alleged offence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that so far as recovery of purse is concerned, in the inquest report itself, the recovery of purse has been mentioned and therefore, the question of further recovery of purse on the confessional statement of Jaipal Marki does not arise. 2026:JHHC:22600 2 5. Learned counsels for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, have opposed the prayer for bail and it is not in dispute that the name of Viksal Marki has come in the confessional statement of the co-accused Jaipal Marki, but so far as Jaipal Marki is concerned, it has been stated that on the basis of his confession statement and from another place near Peepal tree, where he was working in nursery, a red colored purse has been recovered containing the Voter card and other belongings of the deceased. The learned counsels submit that so far as the inquest report is concerned, the same relates to a black colored purse which has been shown to have been recovered. They submit that there is recovery on the basis of confessional statement of Jaipal Marki and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for bail. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and upon going through the case-diary, it appears that on the basis of confessional statement of Jaipal Marki, there is recovery of personal belongings of the deceased and accordingly, this Court is not inclined to enlarge Jaipal Marki on bai and hence, B.A. No. 5876 of 2026 is rejected. 7. So far as Viksal Marki is concerned, it appears that his name has come only in the confessional statement. In such circumstances, the petitioner in B.A. No. 5385 of 2026 namely, Viksal Marki 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 Additional Sessions Judge-I, Simdega in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 13 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 73 of 2024, on the following conditions: (i) 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. (ii) 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. 2026:JHHC:22600 3 (iii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court. 8. B.A. No. 5385 of 2026 is allowed. 9. It further appears from the impugned order dated 18.03.2026 that out of 7 witnesses, two witnesses have already been examined. 10. The State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court and the FSL report be also duly obtained and forwarded to the court concerned. 11. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution, Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and FSL, Ranchi to ensure compliance. 12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:30.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:31.07.2026