Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24786 (JHR)

VICKY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./6621/2026 · 2026-09-01

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:26267 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6621 of 2026 Vicky Kumar, aged about 33 years, S/o Hiralal Ram, resident of village – Hosir, Dhobi tola, P.O. – Hosir, P.S. – Gomia, District - Bokaro … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Pragati Prasad, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vijoy Kr. Sinha, APP --- 06/01.09.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Gomia P.S. Case No.88 of 2024, corresponding to S.T. Case No.413 of 2024, registered under Sections 124 (1), 103 (1) of B.N.S, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – II, FTC, Bermo at Tenughat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 31.08.2024 and charges have been framed but the witnesses are not being produced. The bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merits in B.A. No.2754 of 2025 vide order dated 23.07.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that as per allegations, the petitioner is alleged to have been immolated the deceased, due to which she succumbed to her injuries. As per paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit, there are only 3 remaining witnesses to be examined before the court and the State has undertaken to produce all the 3 remaining witnesses for examination on 09.09.2026. He submits that it is all likely that the prosecution evidence will close on 09.09.2026. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that as per the counter affidavit filed by the State, the remaining witnesses are to be produced for examination on 09.09.2026 and the trial is at fag end, this Cout is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, this bail 2026:JHHC:26267 2 application is rejected. 6. However, if the witnesses are not produced before the court, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after 3 months. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:01.09.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:01.09.2026