Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28407 (JHR)

JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./9316/2026 · 2026-10-06

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:29811 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9316 of 2026 ------ Jitendra Kumar Yadav, aged about 23 years, son of late Bhagwan Yadav, resident of Near DT 1440, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa (Hatia), Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Deepankar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 06.10.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No.129 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2)/ 115(2)/108/352/351(2)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had abetted the suicide of Pradhan Yadav. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that there is no immediate provocation given by the petitioner which could have led the deceased to commit suicide rather in the FIR, it has been mentioned that as Sukhdeo Yadav and Munna Yadav gave wrong statement and settlement could not be arrived at between the members of the family of the petitioner and the members of the family of the deceased who are admittedly neighbours, out of tension the deceased has committed suicide. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.07.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 04 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, 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 learned C.J.M, Ranchi, in connection with Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No.129 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 06.10.2026 Gunjan-