Jitendra Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 2647 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Jitendra Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party on 2 April, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                  2026:JHHC:9347

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                          B.A. No. 797 of 2026

    Jitendra Sahu, aged about 38 years, son of Ramanand Sahu, R/o Village
    Nabrangpur, Subliyea, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District-Sundergarh (Orissa)
                                                    ...     ...     Petitioner
                                Versus
    The State of Jharkhand                          ...     ... Opp. Party

                        ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate

---

nd 03/2 April 2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. Case No. 617/2025 arising out of Chanho P.S. Case No. 40/2020 for the offence registered under Sections 366, 302, 328, 376D, 342, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on, charges has been framed against the petitioner for offence under Sections 366, 302, 328, 376D, 342, 34 of IPC, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner VI-cum-Special Judge F.T.C. (CAW) Ranchi.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the suicide note where the name of the petitioner transpires has not been written by the victim, inasmuch as, the same has not been examined through handwriting expert. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.04.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been submitted.

3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that in view of suicide note, the petitioner is involved in the present case and there are serious allegations against the petitioner and it has been alleged by the father of the victim-the informant, that the victim was forcibly kidnapped by one Meraj Khan and his associates Jitendra

2026:JHHC:9347

Sahu, the present petitioner on the pretext that her brother-in-law met with an accident and they took her to Sundergarh where she was kept in the house of Anisa Khatoon and when she refused to the proposal of marriage of Meraj, she was confined in a dark room and was repeatedly raped by all the accused persons.

4. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and also the suicide note, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected.

5. Upon this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial may be expedited which is running at the stage of evidence.

6. The State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses during trial.

7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure prompt production of the witnesses on the date as may be fixed by the learned trial court.

8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through 'e-mail/FAX'.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 02.04.2026 Uploaded On: 03.04.2026 Mukul/-