2026:JHHC:24945 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7782 of 2026 Jawed Alam @ Shekh Jawed, aged about 32 years, son of Sekh Shamim, resident of Aamjhar, Near Madina Masjid, P.O. and P.S. Baliapur, District-Dhanbad, (Jharkhand) … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Zaid Imam, Advocate : Md. Saddam Ansari, Advocate : Mr. Biplav Bhuiyan, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Rishi Pallav, Advocate : Mr. Divyansh Krishna, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, APP --- 05/19.08.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2026 in connection with S.T. Case No. 543 of 2026 arising out of Baliapur P.S. Case No. 61 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. No. 1729 of 2026, registered under Section 80(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the Court of learned District and Addl. Sessions Judge X-cum-F.T.C Crime Against Women-cum-Spl. Judge Anti-Corruption Bureau, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner happens to be the husband of the deceased. The marriage was solemnized on 17.11.2019 and the incident had occurred on 31.03.2026 when the wife of the petitioner was found dead in her matrimonial home under unnatural conditions. The petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2026 and charge has already been framed on 09.07.2026, but no witness has turned up so far. He has submitted that all other family members who are accused in this case have been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court. The orders passed in anticipatory bail applications have been placed on record. 4. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is an allegation of demand of dowry 2026:JHHC:24945 2 and the petitioner used to torture and assault the deceased. He submits that there was demand of dowry, that is , money and car. 5. Learned counsel for the State has also opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that while granting anticipatory bail to the co- accused, it has been taken into consideration that the husband is in custody. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the allegation against the petitioner with regard to assault and demand of dowry coupled with the fact that the deceased died in unnatural condition in her matrimonial home, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. However, State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court. 8. 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. 9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:19.08.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:20.08.2026