LOKNATH BARJO ALIAS LOKHNATH BARJO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./549/2026 · 2026-04-08
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5760 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5760 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:9998 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 549 of 2026
Loknath Barjo @ Lokhnath Barjo, son of Letka Barjo.
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, APP
--- 04/08.04.2026
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2025 in connection with Gudri P.S. Case No.03 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. Case No.252 of 2025, registered under Sections 103(1)/238/3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 and under Sections 4/5 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practice Act, thereafter cognizance has been taken under Sections 103 (1), 238 r/w section 3 (5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and under Sections 4/5 Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practice Act, now pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Chakradharpur (Chaibasa).
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioner. He has further submitted that 2 witnesses have been examined out of 7 witnesses and they have not made any allegation against the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the manner in which the offence was committed is heinous. He has further submitted that the petitioner was also involved in the commission of offence, and that the accused persons, including the petitioner, have confessed their guilt. It is submitted that the bodies of the deceased persons were thrown into the river, and injuries were found by way of sharp cutting weapons.
5. Considering the heinous nature of offence and the fact that the trial is going on, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
2026:JHHC:9998 2
6. However, the State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the court.
7. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police and Director, Prosecution of the concerned district for compliance.
8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:08.04.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:09.04.2026