[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Ramkrishna Gorai vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 24 February, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:5365
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.11624 of 2025
-----
Ramkrishna Gorai, son of Manik Gorai, resident of village Saluka, PO
Bindapathar, PS Bindapathar, District Jamtara, Jharkhand
... Petitioner(s).
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party(s).
with
B.A. No.11712 of 2025
-----
Subhash Gorai @ Subhash Chandra Gorai, son of late Adalat Gorai,
resident of village Saluka, PO Bindapathar, PS Bindapathar, District
Jamtara, Jharkhand ... Petitioner(s).
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party(s).
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
(through V.C.)
Ms. Ashwini Priya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, PP
Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. PP
(through V.C.)
.........
03 /24.02.2026: These bail applications have been filed under Sections 483
& 484 of BNSS, 2023 wherein, prayer has been made for grant of
bail as they are in custody for allegedly committing offence
punishable under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita.
2. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl. PP appears through virtual
mode. They does not have any complain about the clarity and
quality of audio and video.
3. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel
for the State and have also gone through the impugned order.
4. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
2026:JHHC:5365
5. This is a case where there is an allegation against the
petitioners along with others that they have committed murder
of the deceased.
6. After going through the records and hearing the parties, I
find that only on the basis of suspicion the petitioners have been
made accused in this case and kept in custody. The chargesheet
has already been submitted in this case. The evidence which has
been collected in the investigation against the petitioners are that
three months prior to the date of occurrence the petitioners and
others have threatened the deceased because of some dispute.
Another evidence which has been collected is that on the
confessional statement of these petitioners the rope and blood
stained soil was recovered. In this context it is necessary to
mention that dead body was recovered on 15.09.2025 at 12:00
noon, i.e. on the date when the First Information Report was
lodged. Arrest of the petitioners were made on 23.09.2025 at
13:13 hours and confession of the petitioners were recorded on
23.09.2025 at 14:20 hours and the recovery of rope and blood
stained soil were made on the same date at 15:50 hours. It is
pertinent to mention that recovery was made within 150 meters
from the place of occurrence where the dead body was found. It
is surprising that when the dead body was found, the police did
not discovered these materials from there, as there is no whisper
about presence of these materials in the vicinity. This creates a
doubt in the mind of the Court as to whether actually on the
basis of the statement of these petitioners anything was
recovered or not.
7. Considering the very week nature of evidence which has
been collected during the investigation and there is no further
scope investigation in this case, I am inclined to grant bail to the
2026:JHHC:5365
petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, are
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M.,
Jamtara in connection with Bindapathar PS Case No. 66 of 2025
subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be a close
relative of the petitioners, having sufficient landed property in
his own name within the State of Jharkhand.
8. Accordingly, these bail applications are allowed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
24.02.2026
Tanuj/CP-3
Uploaded on 24.02.2026
