Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5161 (JHR)

BINAY URAON v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./11619/2025 · 2026-02-19

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:5218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11619 of 2025 Binay Uraon, aged about 24 years, Son of Rusa Uraon, resident of Village – Banpur, P.O. – Dahu Nawada, P.S. – Tandwa, District – Chatra. ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anupam Anand, Advocate. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P. --------- Order No. 03/Dated: 19th February, 2026 1. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 196 of 2025, registered under Sections 103 (2), 238, 61(2), 127(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practice Act, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no specific role has been attributed against the petitioner, rather there is direct allegation against the co-accused Ajay Oraon. There are general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail. 3. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has submitted that the present petitioner along with other five co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention approached the house of the deceased and cut his tongue and thereafter also went towards the field of the village along with son and husband of the informant, where also assaulted by lathi and danda, calling him witch. The informant’s husband died due to brutal manner of assault by present petitioner and other co-accused. 2026:JHHC:5218 In view of serious nature of offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, he does not deserve the privilege of bail. 4. It appears that there is serious allegation of committing murder and also assaulting his son and threatening extended to his wife suspecting them to be witch. The tongue of deceased namely, Dharmadev Oraon was cut by co-accused and taken away. The presence and participation of the present petitioner has also been stated by the informant and other witnesses interrogated during investigation. 5. Considering the seriousness of the offence committed by the petitioner, I am not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) February 19, 2026 Sunil/