Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 346 (JHR)

JAIDEV BAURI @ JAIDEO BAURI @ JAYDEV BAURI v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./160/2026 · 2026-03-16

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:7052 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 160 of 2026 Jaidev Bauri @ Jaideo Bauri @ Jaydev Bauri, aged about 32 years, son of Raju Bauri @ Ranjit Bauri, resident of Village Nutandih, PO. Banstora, P.S. Chandankiyari (Barmasis O.P.), District Bokaro, Jharkhand ....Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite party CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr Atanu Banerjee, Advocate For the State : Mr.Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P 03/16.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T Case No. 291 of 2025 arising out of Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 105 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No. 898 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bokaro. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation appears to be false in view of the medical report because when there will be a cut on the vocal cord of a person he will not be able to speak and the statement of the informant is concocted one. He further submits that out of 7 charge-sheeted witnesses only 3 charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined and one is no more and only 3 witnesses remain to be examined. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 15.05.2025; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against this petitioner; as such, he does not deserve grant of regular bail. 5. Looking to the allegation made against this petitioner and also the status report that out of 7 charge-sheeted witnesses, only 3 charge- sheeted witnesses have been examined and one is no more and only 3 witnesses remain to be examined, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for regular bail after 3 months. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 16th March, 2026 jk Uploaded on 18 /03/2026