2026:JHHC:24770 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7734 of 2026 Amar Gorai, aged about 26 years, son of Sri Chinto Gorai, resident of Nunudih Basti, Near Durga Mandir, P.O. Patherdih, P.S. Sudamdih, District: Dhanbad, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Naveen Kumar Gaunjhu, APP --- 05/18.08.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.07.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 686 of 2025 arising out of Sudamdih P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3000 of 2025, registered under Section 80(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned District and Additional sessions Judge III cum commercial court, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the marriage was solemnized on 11.06.2023 and she committed suicide in the bathroom in her matrimonial home on 16.07.2025. The learned counsel submits that there was peaceful marriage and the petitioner and his wife used to go to the parental house of the wife from time to time. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter submits that no injury has been found on the body of the deceased except the mark regarding commission of suicide. She died of hanging. The learned counsel submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against all the family members of the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the case is at the stage of trial and there are only 04 charge-sheeted witnesses. He submits that no witness has been examined, although as per the impugned order, summons to PWs were issued as back as on 2026:JHHC:24770 2 26.02.2026. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party State has opposed the prayer for bail. 7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this court finds that the deceased died in her matrimonial home under unnatural condition immediately after two years of marriage and there is allegation of demand of dowry and assault. It is alleged that on 14.07.2025 at 12:00 hours, the deceased informed the informant on phone that if they did not fulfill the demand of money, she would be killed. Subsequently, they tried to arrange money, but on 16.07.2025, they were informed that the deceased had died. 8. Considering the nature of allegation and also the fact that there was demand of dowry, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 9. However, there can be no excuse for non-production of witnesses before the learned court and the State cannot detain anybody in jail and simultaneously not produce the witnesses for examination. The State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court. If any FSL report is to be obtained from the authority, the same be also forwarded to the learned court concerned. 10. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance. 11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:18.08.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:20.08.2026