Dismissed¶5

Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jun 2026B.A./4200/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand HC Ranchi 2026 bail application rejected; Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi; B.A. No. 4200 of 2026; Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024; S.T. No. 143 of 2024; Section 376(D) IPC; Additional Sessions Judge Pakur; custody since 15.06.2024; consistency with prior co-accused bail rejections B.A. No. 6302 of 2025 (31.07.2025) and B.A. No. 7464 of 2025 (01.09.2025); trial ongoing, witness production directive; Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.; dated 09.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

This court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, and accordingly rejected his prayer for bail. ¶5

Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi, in custody in Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024 / S.T. No. 143 of 2024 (Section 376(D) IPC) pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur, should be enlarged on bail.

¶5

Court's answer

This court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, and accordingly rejected his prayer for bail.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The refusal rested on: (i) the seriousness of the allegation made against the petitioner; (ii) this court having already rejected the bail applications of the co-accused Chand Soren, Vishnath Hembrom @ Vishwanath Hembrom, Vivek Soren and Manvel Marandi @ Manwel Marandi vide orders dated 31.07.2025 and 01.09.2025 in B.A. No. 6302 of 2025 and B.A. No. 7464 of 2025; and (iii) the trial being in progress.

¶5

Key takeaways

Ancillary operative direction: the State was directed to ensure that the remaining (unexamined) witnesses be promptly produced before the court.ratio¶6
Compliance mechanism: learned counsel for the State directed to communicate the order to the Director, Prosecution and to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance; order also to be conveyed to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application REJECTED. High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.), B.A. No. 4200 of 2026, order dated 09.06.2026: declined to enlarge Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi on bail in S.T. No. 143 of 2024 (Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024, Section 376 (D) IPC) pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur. Grounds: seriousness of the allegations; this court's earlier rejection of bail for co-accused Chand Soren, Vishnath Hembrom @ Vishwanath Hembrom, Vivek Soren and Manvel Marandi @ Manwel Marandi (orders dated 31.07.2025 and 01.09.2025 in B.A. No. 6302 of 2025 and B.A. No. 7464 of 2025); and trial already underway (2 of 16 charge-sheeted witnesses examined till 03.02.2026). Petitioner in custody since 15.06.2024. Ancillary directions: State to promptly produce remaining witnesses; order to be communicated to Director (Prosecution) and district SP; order sent to the court concerned by FAX/e-mail.

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:16484 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

B.A. No. 4200 of 2026

¶4

Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi son of Ramesh Marandi

¶5

… … Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party ---

¶8

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶9

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnupad Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Fahad Alam, A.P.P.

¶11

¶12

03 /09.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶13

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024, S.T. No. 143 of 2024, for the offences registered under Section 376 (D) of IPC, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has no criminal antecedent. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.06.2024.

¶14

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused is very serious and trial has already commenced. He submits that out of 16 charge sheeted witnesses, 2 witnesses were examined till 03.02.2026 and a few must have been examined by now. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the seriousness of allegation made against the petitioner, and also the fact that bail application of the co-accused namely Chand Soren, Vishnath Hembrom @ Vishwanath Hembrom, Vivek Soren and Manvel Marandi @ Manwel Marandi have been rejected by this court vide orders dated 31.07.2025 and 01.09.2025 in B.A. No. 6302 of 2025 and in B.A. No. 7464 of 2025 respectively and the trial is going on, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected. 6. However, the State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses be promptly produced before the court.

¶15

( 2026:JHHC:16484 )

¶16

7. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution and to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned District to ensure compliance.

¶17

8. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail.

¶18

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶19

Dated: 09.06.2026 Uploaded on 10.06.2026

¶20

Binit/

¶21

Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lukhiram Marandi @ Babulal Marandi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Premchand Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanchan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vishal Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amresh Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anand Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jagay Tuti Alias Jagaidhu Dudi Alias Jagai Tuti Vs the State of Jharkhand