Din Dayal Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 1736 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Din Dayal Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party on 10 March, 2026

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                                      [2026:JHHC:6280]
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                B.A. no. 1350 of 2026

                  Din Dayal Kumar, aged about 24 years, s/o Mahesh Ram, R/o
                  village Godhar Kali Basti No.9, P.O. Dhansar, P.S. Kusunda,
                  District- Dhanbad                       ... Petitioner
                                        Versus

                  The State of Jharkhand                       ...      Opp. party


         Coram:   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

                  For the Petitioner     : Mr. M.B.Lal, Adv.
                  For the State         : Mr. Tarun Kumar , Addl. PP




02 / 10.03.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kenduadih P. S. case no. 57 of 2023 instituted under Section 323, 326, 307, 504, 34 of IPC.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of the common intention with the co-accused persons, committed murder of the informant - Rita Dhari. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the allegation of assault with the sword in upon Dharam Ram. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view of the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons being variously armed, assaulted the informant, hence, the petitioner is squarely responsible for the activities of commission of murder of the informant and in view of the fact that Fardbeyan of the deceased is to be treated as dying declaration, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and also there is chance of the petitioner tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of his tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage.

(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

Dated 10.03.2026 Smita/-