[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Vimlesh Mahto @ Vimlesh Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 17 February, 2026
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
2026:JHHC:4464
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 10646 of 2025
1. Vimlesh Mahto @ Vimlesh Kumar Singh, aged about 35 years,
son of Ramdas Mahto, R/O- Village- Tariya, P.O. & P.S.- Tarhasi,
District- Palamu, Jharkhand.
2. Rakesh Mahto @ Rakesh Kumar Singh, aged about 29 years, son
of Ramdas Mahto, R/O- Village- Tariya, P.O. & P.S.- Tarhasi,
District- Palamu, Jharkhand. ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. A. K. Kashyap, Senior Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Ms. Kumari Rashmi, APP
---
03/17.02.2026 Heard Mr. A. K. Kashyap, learned Senior counsel for the
petitioners.
2. Heard Ms. Kumari Rashmi, learned APP appearing on behalf of
the opposite party- State of Jharkhand.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners
are in custody since 04.08.2025 in connection with Tarhasi P.S. Case
No. 67 of 2025, registered under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, now pending in the court of learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, at Palamu.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the
informant is the brother of the deceased boy and the First Information
Report has been lodged on 04.08.2025. The informant stated that on
01.08.2025 his brother (deceased) left home and did not return. In the
First Information Report it is alleged that the brother of the informant
was having love affair with daughter of Upendra Mahto and Upendra
Mahto and his brothers had tried counselling of both the persons - the
boy and the girl. It has been alleged in the First Information Report
that the body of the boy and the girl aged 22 and 21 years respectively
was recovered from the well and upon recovery of the body, the First
Information Report was instituted.
5. Learned Senior counsel submits that there is no eye-witness to
2026:JHHC:4464
the occurrence. He has also submitted that the marriage of the girl was
already fixed at Chatra, still the boy and the girl continued to have
relationship.
6. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has further submitted
that except confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing
against the petitioners. He submits that the charge-sheet has been
submitted on 29.10.2025 and the petitioners are in custody since
04.08.2025.
7. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand,
has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioners are
named in the First Information Report and there is every motive for
the petitioners to commit the offence as the daughter in their family
was involved in the affair with the brother of the informant.
8. However, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for
the State has not been able to point out any eye-witness or any
material from the case-diary except the confessional statement of the
co-accused.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that
no material except confessional statement could be pointed out by the
learned counsel for the opposite party- State, the petitioners are
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Palamu in connection with Tarhasi P.S. Case No. 67 of
2025, on the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the
petitioners.
(ii) The other bailor should be close relative of the concerned
petitioner.
(iii) The petitioners will attend the court on each and every date and
on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the
bail bond furnished by the concerned petitioner.
(iv) The petitioners will deposit a self-attested copy of their Aadhar
2026:JHHC:4464
Card along with their mobile number before the learned court which
they will not change during the pendency of the case without prior
permission of the court.
(v) The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the proceedings
before the learned trial court.
10. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.
11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court
concerned through "FAX/email".
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Date of Order:17.02.2026
Pankaj
Date of Uploading:17.02.2026
