2026:JHHC:24094 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6745 of 2026 1. Dilip Rawani, Aged about 48 Years, S/O- Late Munna Rawani, 2. Chhotu Rawani, Aged about 24 years, S/O- Dilip Rawani 3. Tipani @ Guriya Devi, Aged about 45 years, W/O- Dilip Rawani all resident of Village Teliyadih, P.O & P.S.-Karmatand, District- Jamtara, Jharkhand … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Preetam Mandal, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, Advocate : Ms. Kabisha Goenka, Advocate --- 05/12th August 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners is in custody in connection with G.R. Case No. 232 of 2026 arising out of Karmatar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2026 for the offence registered under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of BNS, now said to have been pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Jamtara. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the in-laws of the deceased. The deceased found missing from home, which was duly informed to her family members and ultimately after four days, her body was recovered from a well. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death is asphyxia due to drowning. The marriage was performed 10 years prior to the date of occurrence. The petitioners are in custody since 10.03.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been submitted. 3. Learned counsel for the Informant, while opposing the prayer for bail, has submitted that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 were arrested on 10.03.2026, whereas petitioner no. 3, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, was evading arrest for about two months and was arrested on 04.05.2026. Learned counsel has referred to the re-statement of the 2026:JHHC:24094 2 informant and submitted that the deceased was overburdened with household work and she had to take care of her two children. On account of the household work, the deceased was being abused by the petitioners and the husband of the deceased used to go out for work. 4. Learned counsel for the State has also opposed the prayer for bail. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that charge-sheet has already been submitted under Section 108 and 3(5) of BNS and that the married had taken place 10 years prior to the date of occurrence, the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Jamtara in connection with Karmatar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2026, subject to the following conditions: - (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioners. (ii) The other bailor should be their close relative. (iii) The petitioners will attend the court on each and every date and on account of their single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioners. (iv) The petitioners would deposit a self-attested copy of their Aadhar Card along with their Mobile Number before the learned court below, which they shall not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e- mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 12.08.2026 Uploaded On; 13.08.2026 Mukul/-