2026:JHHC:26029 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7096 of 2026 Sonu Tiwary @ Sonu Tiwari, aged about 26 years, son of Santosh Tiwary Resident of Village - Karhari, P.O. - Karihari, P.S. – Rajdhanwar (Hirodih at present) District- Giridih … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, APP --- 06/29.08.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.05.2026 in connection with Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 54 of 2026, registered under sections 108/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner and the deceased were not married, but they were just engaged and there was love affair between the petitioner and the victim. He submits that the victim committed suicide. It has been alleged in the First Information Report that at the time of committing suicide, the petitioner and the victim were on video call with each other. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the charge sheet has already been submitted, but no video has been recovered. 5. Learned counsel for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail, has submitted that there is allegation of demand of dowry and in the case diary it is recorded that the phone has been recovered, which has been sent for further examination by the expert. He has submitted that the petitioner had instigated the deceased, which led to commission of suicide by the victim. 2026:JHHC:26029 2 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that there is allegation of demand of dowry in connection with marriage and there is direct allegation against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:29.08.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:01.09.2026