2026:JHHC:6797 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1724 of 2026 Moran Singh Purty, aged about 36 years, son of Late Vikram Purty, resident of village- Baypi Totangsai Tola, P.O. Baypi, P.S. Chakradharpur, District- Singhbhum (West). … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Azeemuddin, APP --- 04/13.03.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 258 of 2025 arising out of Chakradharpur P.S. Case No. 52 of 2025, registered under Sections 103/238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, West Singhbhum, Chakradharpur at Chaibasa Camp Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report, but subsequently he was arrested and the allegation against the petitioner is that he has killed the deceased as the deceased was having illicit relationship with the wife of the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that it is a case of sudden provocation and therefore, the petitioner may be released on bail. 5. During the course of hearing, from the case-diary it transpired that upon confessional statement of the petitioner, the weapon used for killing the victim has also been recovered. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail. 7. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the charge was framed on 10.10.2025, but till 12.12.2025, no witness was examined. 2026:JHHC:6797 2 8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that upon the confessional statement of the petitioner, the murder weapon was also recovered, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 9. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses before the learned court. 10. 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. 11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:13.03.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:13.03.2026