Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Anil Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Home
Jharkhand HC
2026
Anil Oraon Vs the State of JharkhandAnil Oraon v. the State of Jharkhand

Dismissed¶¶14

Anil Oraon v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Jun 2026B.A./4336/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; B.A. No. 4336 of 2026; Anil Oraon v. State of Jharkhand; bail application rejected (second attempt after rejection in B.A. No. 2022/2025 on 05.08.2025); accused in custody since 19.03.2024 in S.T. No. 214/2024 (Basia P.S. Case No. 26/2024, GR Case No. 328/2024) for Section 302/34 and Section 3/4 Witch Craft Practices Act offences before Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Gumla; trial advanced with 6 of 9 witnesses examined by 16.12.2025; directions to State for prompt witness production and intimation to Director, Prosecution and concerned SP; decided 11.06.2026 by Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.

What did the court decide?

Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, that his bail application was earlier rejected on merit, and that the trial is at an advanced stage, the Court declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and rejected the bail application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose earlier bail application was rejected on merit and whose trial is at an advanced stage, should be enlarged on bail in S.T. No. 214/2024.

Court's answer

Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, that his bail application was earlier rejected on merit, and that the trial is at an advanced stage, the Court declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and rejected the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

The State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses during trial.

Key takeaways

Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of the order to the Director, Prosecution as well as the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application rejected. Anil Oraon, in custody since 19.03.2024 in S.T. No. 214/2024 arising out of Basia P.S. Case No. 26/2024 (GR Case No. 328/2024) for offences under Section 302/34 and Section 3/4 of the Witch Craft Practices Act, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Gumla, sought bail after his earlier application (B.A. No. 2022/2025) was rejected on 05.08.2025. With 6 of 9 witnesses (including the Investigating Officer) examined by 16.12.2025 and the trial at an advanced stage, the Court declined to enlarge him on bail and rejected the application, while directing the State to ensure prompt production of the remaining witnesses and directing State counsel to communicate the order to the Director, Prosecution and the concerned Superintendent of Police for compliance.

A

2026:JHHC:16782

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 4336 of 2026

Anil Oraon, Son of Sagar Oraon … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate ---

04/11^th June 2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. No. 214/2024 arising out of Basia P.S. Case No. 26/2024 (GR Case No. 328/2024) for the offence registered under Section 302/34 and Section 3/4 of Witch Craft Practices Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Gumla.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court in B.A. No. 2022/2025 vide order dated 05.08.2025. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 19.03.2024 and witnesses are not turning up to depose before the learned court. He submits that out of 9 witnesses, 6 have been examined till 16.12.2025 including the Investigating Officer.

3. The learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merit and since the trial is at advance stage, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. He submits that the State shall ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced.

4. To this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the next date in the case is 08.07.2026.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and that the bail

1

2026:JHHC:16782

application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merit and the trial is at advance stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected.

6. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses during trial.

7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance.

8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

Dated: 11.06.2026 Uploaded On: Mukul/-

2

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, whose earlier bail application was rejected on merit and whose trial is at an advanced stage, should be enlarged on bail in S.T. No. 214/2024.¶¶14
The court held
Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, that his bail application was earlier rejected on merit, and that the trial is at an advanced stage, the Court declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and rejected the bail application.ratio¶¶14

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Section 302/34302/34¶¶7
Witch Craft Practices Act3/4¶¶7

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner in custody in connection with S.T. No. 214/2024, arising out of Basia P.S. Case No. 26/2024 (GR Case No. 328/2024).¶¶7
Prior proceeding
Offences registered under Section 302/34 and Section 3/4 of the Witch Craft Practices Act.¶¶7
Prior proceeding
Trial pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Gumla.¶¶7
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's earlier bail application rejected by this Court in B.A. No. 2022/2025 vide order dated 05.08.2025.¶¶8
Prior proceeding
Petitioner in custody since 19.03.2024; witnesses not turning up to depose before the trial court.¶¶8
Prior proceeding
Out of 9 witnesses, 6 examined till 16.12.2025, including the Investigating Officer.¶¶8
Prior proceeding
Next date in the trial fixed as 08.07.2026.¶¶10

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Anil Oraon, Son of Sagar Oraon¶¶4
Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda
respondent
The State of Jharkhand¶¶4
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha

Coram

AI extract

Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudharyauthor¶¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Jharkhand HC
Decided on: 11 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 16 May 2026
Case no.: B.A./4336/2026
CNR: JHHC010154072026
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Disposal: Rejected
Case type: B.A.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Manika Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand
10 Jun 2026
Monu Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand
10 Jun 2026
Dulal Mirdha Vs the State of Jharkhand
10 Jun 2026
Rajan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand
11 Jun 2026
Shila Devi Vs State of Jharkhand
11 Jun 2026
Alok Poul @ Alok Pal Vs the State of Jharkhand
11 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

Anil Oraon v. the State of Jharkhand, B.A./4336/2026 (JH), decided on 11 June 2026.

The High Court of Jharkhand publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Section 302/34302/34
Witch Craft Practices Act3/4

View all statutes

Procedural history7

Petitioner in custody in connection with S.T. No. 214/2024, arising out of Basia P.S. Case No. 26/2024 (GR Case No. 328/2024).
Offences registered under Section 302/34 and Section 3/4 of the Witch Craft Practices Act.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Parties & counsel