Rohit Kumar Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 3000 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Rohit Kumar Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 April, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1864 of 2023
       Rohit Kumar Saw                         --- ---     Appellant
                                     Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                  --- ---    Respondent
                                           ---

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

----

For the Appellant : Mr. Sabyasanchi Adv.

             For the State        : A.P.P.
                                        ---
       I.A. No. 4901 of 2026.
07/13.04.2026      Heard Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the
        appellant and learned A.P.P.

The prayer for bail of the appellant was earlier rejected in I.A. No. 9867 of 2023. Subsequent thereto, the appellant had once again moved for grant of bail in I.A. No. 12055 of 2024 which was dismissed and consequent thereto I.A. No. 8414 of 2025 was also filed by the appellant which was dismissed as not pressed.

Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the evidence of P.W.3 indicates that she had stayed with the appellant at her matrimonial house as husband and wife and out of the same, a child was also born. Learned counsel further submits that there was a tacit consent on the part of the parents-in-law of the victim in allowing the appellant and the victim to stay together and, in fact, talks of marriage was also going on but the same did not succeed. Learned counsel submits that the appellant is in custody for about 2 and half years.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

It appears that the husband of the victim died on 27.01.2017 and she continued to stay at her matrimonial house where relationship had developed between the appellant

and the victim consequent to which a child was born. It also appears from the evidence of the victim who has been examined as P.W.3 that the talks of marriage was also undertaken but the same could not fructify. P.W.3 has also asserted that she had stayed at her matrimonial house as wife and husband with the appellant.

On consideration of the evidence of P.W.3, we are inclined to admit the appellant on bail. Accordingly, during pendency of this appeal, the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Koderma in connection with S.T. No. 95/2019.

I.A. No. 4901 of 2026 stands disposed of.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Dated- 13th April, 2026.

Preet/-

Uploaded on: 15 /04/2026.