2026:JHHC:7876 Page | 1 INTHE HIGH COURT OFJHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10519 of 2025 --------- Janki Mahto, Age 42 years, S/O – Jailal Mahto, R/O Village Harladih, P.O. Penk, P.S. Penk Narayanpur, Dist Bokaro, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus STATE OF JHARKHAND … Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Anand, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Tarun Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Anjani Nandan, Advocate ---------- 04/Dated:18thMarch, 2026 1. The instant application has been filed under Sections483 & 484of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Penk Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 55/2024 registered under Sections103(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023pending in the court of learned ACJM at Bermo at Tenughat. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that merely on the basis of the false allegation, the petitioner has been implicated in this present case. 3. It has been submitted that the petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR rather, has been implicated in this case merely on suspicion due to land dispute. 4. It has further been submitted that nothing incriminating has been seized from the possession or place of the petitioner and the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. 2026:JHHC:7876 Page | 2 5. Submission has also been made that the petitioner has been remanded in this case on 23.07.2025 and since then he is in custody, as such, the present petitioner may also be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the opposite party-State although has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has submitted that there is allegation against the petitioner that he, along with co-accused has brutally assaulted an innocent minor kid with an axe leading to his instant death and if the petitioner is admitted on bail at this stage, there is chance of his absconding and influencing the prosecution witnesses, which would affect the progress of trial. 7. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties. 8. It requires to refer herein that vide order dated 04.12.2025 the case diary of the instant case was called for and the same has been received and kept on record. Further Counter affidavit has also been filed by the respondent state. 9. There is allegation against the petitioner that the present petitioner/applicant petitioner along with his son namely Jitendra Mahto and one of his close relative and neighbour Jadu Mahto brutally assaulted by Kudal and committed the murder of David Raj i.e. only son of the informant who was only aged six years with the motive to take revenge of the existing land dispute in the 2026:JHHC:7876 Page | 3 village Harladih (Sasural of informant) on 08.12.2024 at around 05:00 P.M. in the old mud house (non-residing) of the Maika of the informant . 10. From material available on record, it is further evident that the petitioner/applicant is named in the FIR against whom there is specific allegation that he committed murder of informant’s son in a brutal manner by inflicting axe blows over his neck leading to his spot death. The petitioner is the own bhaisur of the informant and there is existing land dispute between the parties. 11. Further from para-92 of the case diary it is apparent that the minor girl child of the informant one Ranjana Kumari being P.W.10 has deposed in her electronic recording of statement she that seen has the petitioner Janki Mahto, Jitendra Mahto and Jadu Mahto while committing the murder of her brother/deceased David Raj at the place of occurrence of murder and after committing the murder these all persons ran away from the place of occurrence. 12. Thus, taking into consideration of the fact that it is a case related with brutal murder of a minor kid and the allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature, this Court is of the view that present application is not fit to be allowed. 13. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected. 2026:JHHC:7876 Page | 4 14. It is made clear that any observation made herein will not prejudice the case of the appellant in course of trial and view as expressed by this Court is only limited to the instant bail application. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) 18th March, 2026 Samarth