Babulal Yadav Vs State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Babulal Yadav Vs State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for regular bail allowed: petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih, in connection with Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025, subject to conditions of appearance on every trial date, non-threatening of witnesses, co-operation in trial, and liberty for the learned trial court to cancel the bail upon any adverse report against the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner, Babulal Yadav, in connection with Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025, registered for the offences under Sections 115(2)/118(1)/117(4)/109/3(5) and later on Section 103(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

Court's answer

Having regard to the submissions of counsel, the allegation in the F.I.R., the grant of bail to co-accused Ganesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav by a coordinate Bench in B.A. No. 8169 of 2025, and the fact that charge has been framed with no witness examined, the court inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih, in connection with Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025.

Ratio / Principle

Conditions of bail imposed: the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial court, shall not threaten any witness, shall co-operate in trial, and if any adverse report comes against him the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, B.A. No. 11480 of 2025 (decided 7th January, 2026, Deepak Roshan, J.; neutral citation 2026:JHHC:218): Regular bail granted to Babulal Yadav (aged about 58), accused in Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025 registered for the offences under Sections 115(2)/118(1)/117(4)/109/3(5) and later on Section 103(2) of B.N.S., 2023. Grounds relied on: an earlier bail application had been rejected; thereafter charge was framed but no witness was examined; and co-accused Ganesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav, also named in the F.I.R., had been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 8169 of 2025. Enlargement ordered on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih. Conditions imposed: appearance on each and every trial date, no threatening of witnesses, co-operation in trial; the learned trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail if any adverse report comes against the petitioner.

2026:JHHC:218

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11480 of 2025

Babulal Yadav, aged about 58 years, S/O Late Arjun Mahto, R/o-Chanddih, P.O.-Kharagdiha, P.S-Jamua, District-Giridih .... Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite party ---

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

--

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P ---

03/07.01.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025, registered for the offences under Sections 115(2)/118(1)/117(4)/109/3(5) and later on Section 103(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and though earlier this application was rejected; however, after that some development has taken place and charge has already been framed; however, no witness has been examined. He further submits that co-accused, namely, Ganesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav, who were also named in the F.I.R, have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 8169 of 2025.

4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the allegation made in the F.I.R; coupled with the fact that the co-accused, namely, Ganesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav, who were also named in the F.I.R, have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 8169 of 2025 and though charge has been framed and no witness has been examined as stated by learned A.P.P, I am

1

2026:JHHC:218

inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the above-named Petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih, in connection with Jamua P.S.Case No. 107/2025.

6. It is made clear that the Petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and he shall not threaten any witness and shall co-operate in trial and if any adverse report will come against the Petitioner, learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of this Petitioner.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

7^th January, 2026 jk Uploaded on 08/01/2026

2