This is a bail application in connection with an offence under Section 302 BNS 2023. The petitioner claimed innocence and pointed to recovery of weapon and bail granted to co-accused. The Court rejected the prayer for bail.
Prayer for grant of bail to the applicant is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2026:JHHC:27368
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 4156 of 2026
Mathura Singh, aged about 50 years, S/o Pato Singh, resident of Village Salatua, P.O. & P.S. Chainpur, District Palamau (Jharkhand)
…. …. Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) -Versus-
The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) : Md. Faruque Ansari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.
08/Dated: 11th September, 2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. The applicant, who is in custody since 11.03.2024, has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T No.273 of 2024, arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.55 of 2024, registered for the offence under Section 302 & 201/34 of the B.N.S, 2023, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Palamau at Daltonganj.
3. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.03.2026 passed in B.A. No.1064 of 2026. 4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant(s) that complete set of FIR along with its enclosure have been annexed with this bail application and there is no suppression on his/her part.
5. Innocence has been claimed by the learned counsel for the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on basis of the confession of this applicant, weapon of the alleged crime i.e., Tangi has been recovered, but no sharp cutting injury has been found. Further, similarly situated other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide orders dated 14.02.2025, 09.07.2024, 10.07.2024 & 27.08.2024 passed in B.A. Nos.1242 of 2025, 5129 of 2024, 5174 of 2024 and 6710 of 2024 respectively. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made.
2026:JHHC:27368
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that this is a different case as because it is a case of honour killing by the father as he had seen his daughter talking with someone else of not liking. The weapon of crime i.e., Tangi had also been recovered.
7. Considering the materials available on record, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail of the applicant is hereby, rejected .
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Dated 11th September, 2026 Raja/Uploaded on 14.09.2026
Page | 2
B.A. No.4156 of 2026
2 issues framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case where co-accused have been granted bail.
Whether the fact that weapon was recovered with confession and absence of sharp cutting injury warrants bail in an honour killing case.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Mathura Singh
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
