Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9304 (JHR)

NAKUL SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./11183/2025 · 2026-04-21

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:11554 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11183 of 2025 Nakul Singh aged about 38 years, S/o Late Bhudheshwar Singh, R/o Village- Domjuri, Mahuldiha, PO and PS- Jaduguda, Distt :- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Kr. Verma, APP --- 07/21.04.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.04.2025 in connection with Jadugoda P.S. Case No.22 of 2025 (G.R. No.138 of 2025) for the offence registered under Sections 64, 103 (1), 238 of the B.N.S. 2023, pending in the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatshila. 3. Learned counsel for the State has produced a copy of the FSL report and submitted that FSL report is supporting the case of the prosecution. 4. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted that the FSL report will be forwarded to the concerned Court by the investigating officer. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in spite of the FSL report, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and as per the confessional statement of the petitioner, he was with the victim. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that as per the case of prosecution petitioner has committed forcible sexual intercourse and ultimately killed the victim. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering that there is direct allegation against the petitioner and the materials collected during investigation support the prosecution case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected. 2026:JHHC:11554 8. The concerned Superintendent of Police of the concerned district is directed to ensure that the FSL report is duly forwarded to the concerned Trial Court. 9. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 21.04.2026 Uploaded on: ……….. sandeep/-