Sanjan Kumar @ Sajjan Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1449 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sanjan Kumar @ Sajjan Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 February, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 2048 of 2023
       Sanjan Kumar @ Sajjan Kumar          --- ---      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. Surendra Prasad Sinha, Adv.

             For the State      : A.P.P.
                                      ---
       I.A. No. 2886 of 2026.
06/24.02.2026     Heard Mr. Surendra Prasad Sinha, learned counsel

for the appellant and learned A.P.P. The prayer for bail of the appellant was earlier dismissed as withdrawn in I.A. No. 6114 of 2024. Subsequent thereto, the appellant had once again moved for grant of bail in I.A. No. 5423 of 2025 which was dismissed vide order dated 01.05.2025.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been convicted primarily on account of suspicion. Reference has been made to the evidence of P.W.11, who happens to be the sister of the deceased who has stated that it was the convict Abhay who used to take the wife of the deceased on a car, but on that particular day, the appellant was inducted as a driver and, therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant was, in any way, connected with the murder of the deceased Arvind Kumar. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant has spent a total period of about five years in custody.

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

It appears that there are strong circumstantial evidence with respect to the involvement of the appellant in conspiring with the other co-convicts in eliminating the

deceased Arvind Kumar. It also appears that the conspiracy angle is further fortified by the fact that the appellant was inducted as a driver of the vehicle on the same day in which the incident of murder had taken place. The recovery of the keys of the car was effected on the disclosure made by the appellant.

On consideration of the aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to re-consider the prayer for bail of the appellant which stands rejected once again at this stage.

I.A. No. 2886 of 2026 stands rejected.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Dated- 24th February 2026.

Preet/-

Uploaded on: 24 /02/2026.