Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 372 (JHR)

SURAJ NAYAK v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./9893/2025 · 2026-03-09

Sanjay Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:6640 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 9893 of 2025 …. Suraj Nayak, aged about 21 years, son of Late Vijay Nayak, resident of Nawadih, PO- Bariatu, PS- Gola, District- Ramgarh ……Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ……Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A. P. P. …… 04/09.03.2026 The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail, who is in custody since 30.05.2025 in connection with Gola P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Section 115 (2) of BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the petitioner is husband. It is submitted that from the subsequent of the Informant, it would appear that there was dispute with regard to non-preparing the breakfast and for not paying Rs. 50/- only and the deceased has consumed phenyl on her own. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30.05.2025 i.e. for more than nine (09) months and hence he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Spl.P.P has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner. 5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears that the petitioner is 2026:JHHC:6640 2 the husband and due to the act of the husband-petitioner, deceased lady had consumed poison substance and due to which, she died. 6. It appears from the subsequent statement of the Informant-Mannu Ghasi recorded at para-3 of the case diary and statement of the witnesses namely Manoj Nayak, Rina Devi and Sagar Kumar respectively recorded at para-4, 5 and 6 of the case diary that they have supported the case of the Informant. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated :- 09.03.2026 Kamlesh/-