2026:JHHC:9740 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 671 of 2026 Krishna Kumar Mistry @ Krishna Sharma, Son of Birendra Sharma @ Birendra Mistry … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, APP --- 03/07.04.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 402 of 2025 arising out of Chutia P.S. Case No. 184 of 2024, registered under Sections 80(2) and 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned A.J.C. VII, Ranchi. 3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is the husband who was married to the victim on 21.05.2021 and the date of death of the victim, that is, his wife in her matrimonial house is 25.08.2024. The learned Senior counsel has further submitted that the cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging and at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was in Godda for which he has referred to annexure-3 to the bail application which is a train ticket. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner has been made accused in this case only because he is the husband. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and has submitted that there is direct allegation of demand of dowry and torture of the victim. He submits that the demand of Rs. 4 lakhs was made and Rs. 2,15,000/- was received in the account of the petitioner. He submits that the allegations are very serious and the victim died in less than a period of three years from the date of marriage out of torture and demand of 2026:JHHC:9740 2 dowry. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation of demand of dowry and torture this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. At this, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial has commenced and out of 05 witnesses, 03 witnesses have already been examined. He submits that the trial may be expedited. 8. The State is directed to ensure prompt production of witnesses before the learned trial court. 9. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution and also to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:07.04.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:09.04.2026