2026:JHHC:9118 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1609 of 2026 Abi Tudu @ Arvind Tudu, aged about 29 years Son of Kirtu Tala Babu Tudu, Resident of Village-Patharkani, Post Office- Pathargama, Police Station- Pathargama, 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-State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate --- 05/01.04.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.07.2025 in connection with Pathargama P.S. Case No. 112 of 2025 Corresponding to G.R. No. 836 of 2025 and Sessions Trial No. 312 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 103(1) B.N.S pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-Vth, Godda. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no recovery of any weapon in connection with the alleged offence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 13.07.2025 and the case is at the stage of evidence, but no prosecution witnesses has been examined. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner is named accused in the First Information Report and the wife of deceased has lodged the FIR who is also the eye witness of the alleged incident. He has also submitted that considering the manner in which the offence has been committed, there is no requirement of any weapon. 2026:JHHC:9118 2 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner, who is the named accused, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. The instant bail application is accordingly rejected. 8. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of witnesses. 9. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 01.04.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-02.04.2026