2026:JHHC:9476 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1804 of 2026 ---- Ashok Yadav son of Late Chhatu Yadav, resident of Village Belgarha, PO Bekobar, PS & District Koderma. .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioner: Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P. ---- 03/02.04.2026 Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 2. By way of this bail application filed under Sections 483 & 484 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 petitioner has prayed for grant of bail as he is in custody for allegedly committing offence under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [Cognizance has been taken for the offence under Sections 80, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] in connection with Koderma Police Station Case No.190 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.65 of 2026, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma. 3. The First Information Report being Koderma Police Station Case No.190 of 2025 was registered on the basis of the written report of the informant. It is alleged that daughter of the informant after marriage with the petitioner in the year 2022, went to her matrimonial home and lived quite well for six months. Thereafter the accused persons started demanding Rs.5,00,000/- and a Bolero vehicle from the informant’s daughter as an additional dowry. Due to non-fulfillment, she was physically and mentally being tortured by the petitioner and other in-laws as named. On 24.10.2025, after getting telephonic information about the ill health of her daughter, the informant along with Moti Yadav (nephew of the informant) went to see her daughter, where she saw that her daughter is lying on a cot. Her daughter disclosed that she was assaulted by the petitioner and other named in-laws on her stomach and she was forcibly administered poison in a glass. She also disclosed about one Jagdish Yadav, who is an advocate, used to assure her in-laws that he will 2026:JHHC:9476 -: 2 :- ensure that nobody goes to jail after she dies. 4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that at the time of incidence, none of the family members of the petitioner, except his mother and the daughter aged 2 years were present. He argued that the allegations in the First Information Report are general and omnibus and there is no specific allegation as against the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case merely because he is the husband of the deceased, whereas in fact, at the time of occurrence the petitioner was at Bangalore. He also contended that two independent witnesses in course of investigation have stated that the deceased told them of consuming poison herself out of anger. He also contended that the cause of death is due to poisoning. 5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 6. I have also gone through the available records including the First Information Report, as also the order passed by the Trial Court rejecting the application for bail of the petitioner and the case diary. 7. Admittedly, the marriage of the deceased with the petitioner was solemnised in 2022 and the incidence took place in 2025. Allegation as per the First Information Report is of demand of dowry and torture due to non- fulfillment of the same. From the Case Diary it transpires that the prosecuting agency collected materials to trace the location of the petitioner at the time of occurrence. As per CDR Tower Location, as mentioned at paragraph 61 of the Case Diary, it transpired that the location of the mobile was found to be at Karnataka from earlier to 24.10.2025 till 27.10.2025 (07.49 a.m.), which suggests that Petitioner was at Karnataka on the date of occurrence and had reached home at Belgarha after receiving information about the incidence. Witnesses have also stated in course of investigation about the petitioner having shifted and living at Bangalore. Petitioner has also brought on record his flight ticket for journey from Bengaluru to Ranchi on 27th October, 2025. Chargesheet in this case has already been submitted and cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under Sections 80 / 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Petitioner, namely, Ashok Yadav, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two 2026:JHHC:9476 -: 3 :- sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, in connection with Koderma Police Station Case No.190 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.65 of 2026, subject to the condition that one of the bailers must be a close relative of the petitioner having sufficient landed property in his own name within the State of Jharkhand. (Ananda Sen, J.) Ranchi, Dated, 2nd April, 2026 Kumar/Cp-03 Uploaded on 04.04.2026