[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Mohan Chouhan vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 25 March, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:8424
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 11415 of 2025
----
Mohan Chouhan, S/o Late Rameshwar Beldar, R/o Karmatia, P.O. & P.S.-
Gomia, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand
.... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
----
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
----
For the Petitioner: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri A.P.P.
----
05/25.03.2026 By way of this bail application filed under Sections 483 & 484 of
the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 petitioner has prayed for grant of
bail as he is in custody for allegedly committing offence in Gomia P.S. Case
No. 87/2024 (S.T. No.63 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 550/2024)
punishable under Section 103 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge I, Bermo at Tenughat.
2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner learned counsel for the
State and have also gone through the impugned order.
3. There is allegation against this petitioner that he killed informant's
son namely, Mukesh Kumar on 27.08.2024 and hid the murder weapon in a
water filled coal mine. Although, this petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., he
was arrested on the basis of suspicion on 31.08.2024 and gave his
confessional statement.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are as many
as 19 chargesheeted witneses, out of which only seven witnesses have been
examined. He submits that save and except suspicion and confessional
statement, nothing has surfaced in the investigation nor the witnesses
examined so far have stated any worth in their evidence so as to implicate this
petitioner.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. After hearing the parties and after going through the record, I find
that the implication of the petitioner is only on the basis of suspicion and his
own confessional statement. Admittedly, the petitioner is not named in the First
Information Report nor any aspersion was made by the informant against the
petitioner in the First Information Report. There is no eye witness to the
occurrence in this case nor it is a case of last seen. Further, the prosecution
case is also not corroborated by the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory,
2026:JHHC:8424
inasmuch as, it has been observed by the Forensic Science Laboratory that
the DNA profile generated from the source blood positive T-Shirt cutting is
mixed profile from more than one humane source of origin. However, identity
of individuals could not be ascertained, as reference sample was not provided
for comparison.
7. Considering the aforesaid, I am inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner. Petitioner, namely, Mohan Chouhan, is directed to be released on
bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions
Judge-1, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Gomia Police Station Case
No.87 of 2024 (G.R. No.550 of 2024) corresponding to Sessions Trial No.63 of
2025, subject to the condition that one of the bailers must be a close relative of
the petitioner having sufficient landed property in his own name within the
State of Jharkhand.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
Ranchi, Dated, 25th March, 2026
Kumar/Cp-03
Uploaded on 25.03.2026
