[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Niraj Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... .... ... on 10 February, 2026
Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary
2026:JHHC:3539
2026:JHHC:3540
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 6696 of 2025
------
Niraj Kumar Singh, son of Bhola Singh, resident of Village Sirsi, P.O. and
P.S. Katkamdag, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
.... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opp. Party
With
B.A. No. 7162 of 2025
------
Ruchi Kumari @ Diya Sahu, daughter of Rajdip Sao, resident of Demotand,
P.O. Demotand, P.S. Mufasil, District Hazaribagh
.... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opp. Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Ms. Nidhi Singh, Advocate
(In B.A. No. 6696 of 2025)
Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedy, Advocate
(In B.A. No. 7162 of 2025)
For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Special P.P.
(In B.A. No. 6696 of 2025)
Mr. Ajay Kumar Pathak, A.P.P.
(In B.A. No. 7162 of 2025)
For the Informant : Mr. Arwind Kumar, Advocate
(In both cases)
------
Order No.06 / Dated : 10.02.2026
Bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioners- Niraj Kumar Singh,
and Ruchi Kumari @ Diya Sahu, who are in custody since 21.11.2024 in
connection with S.T. No. 73 of 2025 arising out of Tandwa P.S. Case No. 259
of 2024 for the offence registered under Sections 140(2), 3(5), 103(1), 109, 238,
61(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge III, Chatra, is pressed into motion.
The matter involves kidnapping for ransom of two young boys and
after the said kidnapping when they were being taken away, they were
mercilessly assaulted, as a result of which one of them died and one
survived the assault. The case was initially lodged against unknown,
however, the persons involved in the crime were traced on the basis of
CCTV footage recorded near a hotel, where the victim and the deceased
2026:JHHC:3539
2026:JHHC:3540
were shifted to another vehicle and have lunch in the said hotel.
Learned counsel, Ms. Nidhi Singh, appearing on behalf of
petitioner- Niraj Kumar Singh submits that there is no legal evidence against
this petitioner and he has been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion.
Except for confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no actionable
evidence on which the suspicion can be founded. One of the victim namely
Akash Kumar has also not named this petitioner after his recovery.
Learned counsel, Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedy appearing on
behalf of the petitioner- Ruchi Kumari @ Diya submits that the ladies, who
were present there, had given the opportunity and asked the victim- Akash
Kumar to run away from the captivity. It has also come in the statement of
Akash Kumar under Section 183 of the BNSS, that the ladies had requested
the other co-accused Dhannu Paswan to release both the kidnapped persons.
Learned A.P.P. assisted by learned counsel on behalf of the
informant vehemently opposed the bail petition. It is submitted that it was a
cold-blooded murder after kidnapping for ransom. Charge in this case has
been framed and both these petitioners have been identified by the victim
Akash Kumar, who survived the incident. As a matter of fact, it was lady
members, who signaled the vehicle to stop and the moment, it came to a
halt, other co-accused persons entered and kidnapped both the boys.
Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for
bail of the petitioners stands rejected.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Anit
Uploaded
11.02.2026
