Narayan Prasad @ Tejnarayan Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2715 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Narayan Prasad @ Tejnarayan Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 April, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

    THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                 Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 521 of 2023
    1. Narayan Prasad @ Tejnarayan Prasad
    2. Ganpat Prasad                           ...    Appellants
                                Versus
    The State of Jharkhand                    ...        Respondent
                            ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

For the Appellants : Mr. A.K. Kashyapo, Sr.Advocate For the State : APP For the Informant : Mr. Shahdeo Choudhary, Advocate

---

    Order No. 10                                    Dated 06th April, 2026

          I.A. No. 2969 of 2026

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties for the appellant No. 2.

This application has been preferred by the appellant No. 2 for grant of bail to them during the pendency of this appeal.

The prayer for bail of the appellant No. 2 was earlier dismissed as withdrawn in 5481 of 2024 and I.A. No. 7980 of 2024. The appellant No. 2 had thereafter moved this Court for grant of bail in I.A. No. 4860 of 2025 which has been dismissed vide order dated 09.05.2025.

Submission has been advanced by the learned senior counsel for the appellant No. 2 that there is a case and counter case between the parties and both the sides had suffered injuries. It has also been submitted that at best it can be a case u/s 304 I.P.C. It has further been submitted that the appellant No. 2 is in custody for 3 ½ years. It has also been submitted that the postmortem report reveals that the injuries was sustained by the deceased on account of an assault with the blunt portion of the axe which further demolishes the case of the prosecution.

Learned APP as well as the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant No. 2.

It appears from the evidence of PW-1, PW-3, PW-5 and PW-6 that the assault was committed upon the deceased with the blunt portion of the axe and the same finds corroboration from the postmortem report.

On consideration of the aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to admit the appellant No. 2 on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected at this stage.

This I.A. stands rejected.

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

(PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.) 06.04.2026 MK

Page-2