2026:JHHC:30006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8121 of 2026 Arvind Mishra @ Sonu Mishra, aged about 32 years, son of late Pankaj Mishra, Resident of Village – Partappure, Post Office – Meharma, Police Station – Meharma, District – Godda, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anup Kr. Agarwal, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Fahad Allam, APP --- 07/07.10.2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Meharma P.S. Case No.142 of 2023, corresponding Sessions Trial No.140/2024, registered under Section 302 IPC, now pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge – Vth, Godda. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.12.2023 and lastly his bail application was rejected vide order dated 11.03.2026 in BA No.1442 of 2026, indicating that out of 6 prosecution witnesses, only 3 were examined. He submits that a direction was issued by this Court for prompt production of the witnesses and a copy of the order was also directed to be communicated to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that when the case was taken up by this Court on 10.09.2026 and the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district was called upon to inform this Court as to why the prosecution witnesses were not being produced, the remaining 3 witnesses have been produced before the trial court on 30.09.2026. He submits that the prosecution evidence has not yet closed. He refers to order dated 30.09.2026 as uploaded on 2026:JHHC:30006 2 the website of the concerned court. 5. Learned counsel submits that all the material witnesses have been examined and considering the custody of the petitioner, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. He submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He further submits that after the rejection order of this Court on 11.03.2026, numerous dates were fixed by the court, i.e., on 26.03.2026, 20.04.2026, 07.05.2026, 03.06.2026, 25.06.2026 and 20.07.2026, but no witness was examined. 6. The learned counsel for the State has filed counter affidavit before this Court pursuant to the order dated 10.09.2026, which is taken on record. However, the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not in dispute. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the custody of the petitioner since 29.12.2023 and the material prosecution witnesses have already been examined and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge – Vth, Godda in connection with Meharma P.S. Case No.142 of 2023, corresponding Sessions Trial No.140/2024, on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the 2026:JHHC:30006 3 pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court. 8. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:07.10.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:08.10.2026