Amrit Oraon Aged About 26 Years vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 1427 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Amrit Oraon Aged About 26 Years vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party on 20 February, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                                   ( 2026:JHHC:5286 )




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                         B.A. No. 11830 of 2025

               Amrit Oraon aged about 26 years, son of Ranthu Oraon, resident of
               village Jalim Kalan Jobeya, P.O. Jalim, P.S. and District Latehar,
               Jharkhand                                ...      ...       Petitioner
                                          Versus
               The State of Jharkhand            ...              ... Opp. Party
                                          ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhouri Avinash Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, APP

---

03/20.02.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 25.07.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 194 of 2025, arising out of Chandwa P.S. Case No. 95 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No. 709 of 2025, registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5). of the BNS 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he had killed the uncle of the informant by fire arm in presence of the informant but the petitioner was not aware that his fire arm was loaded and the firing is only by an accident. During the course of hearing, it is not the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has a license of fire arm.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation against the petitioner and informant is an eye witness to the occurrence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

6. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 20.02.2026

Uploaded on: 21.02.2026

Binit/