Babudhan Soren Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Babudhan Soren Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both petitioners enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj, in connection with Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 617/2025, subject to the stated conditions (pairvikar and close-relative bailors, attendance on every date with cancellation on single default, deposit of self-attested Aadhar Card copy and mobile number, and full co-operation with trial proceedings); the order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petitions to be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/email.

Issue for consideration

Whether the two petitioners, named accused in Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 / G.R. Case No. 617/2025 (registered under Section 70(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and in custody since 13.08.2025, should be enlarged on bail, given that the victim and another witness have turned hostile.

Court's answer

After hearing counsel and considering the submissions and the fact that the victim has turned hostile, the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj, in connection with Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 617/2025.

Ratio / Principle

The enlargement on bail is made subject to conditions: (i) one bailor to be the petitioners' present pairvikar; (ii) the other bailor a close relative; (iii) attendance in court on each and every date, with cancellation of the bail bond on even a single default; (iv) deposit of a self-attested copy of Aadhar Card with mobile number, not to be changed during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court; and (v) full co-operation with the proceedings before the learned trial court.

Key takeaways

The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) | Order dated 14.07.2026 | B.A. No. 590 of 2026 (Babudhan Soren) With B.A. No. 831 of 2026 (Bhutu Murmu @ Dasmat Murmu) v. The State of Jharkhand (and Victim/Informant in B.A. No. 590 of 2026). Two bail applications tagged together as arising out of the same FIR — Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 617/2025, registered under Section 70(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj; petitioners in custody since 13.08.2025. Counsel submitted that the victim (70 years of age) and one more witness have been examined and both have turned hostile; per the victim's evidence she had gone to the police station as her Rs. 7000/- was missing and refused to identify the petitioners. Counsel for the informant raised no objection to enlargement on bail, and State's counsel had nothing to say once the victim turned hostile. Considering the submissions and the victim having turned hostile, the court directed both petitioners to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj, on conditions: (i) one bailor to be the petitioners' present pairvikar; (ii) the other bailor a close relative; (iii) attendance in court on each and every date, bail bond to be cancelled on even a single default; (iv) deposit of self-attested Aadhar Card copy with mobile number, not changeable during pendency without prior permission of the court; (v) full co-operation with trial proceedings. Application allowed; order and copy of affidavit filed with the bail petitions to be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/email.

2026:JHHC:20755

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 590 of 2026

Babudhan Soren, Son of- Champai Soren

The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim/Informant … … Opposite Parties

With

B.A. No. 831 of 2026

Bhutu Murmu @ Dasmat Murmu, S/O- Late Nore Murmu @ Nore Murmu … … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

In B.A. No. 590 of 2026

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, APP For the Informant : Ms. Kabisha Goenka, Advocate

In B.A. No. 831 of 2026

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate : Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, APP ---

06 /14.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. These two bail applications have been tagged together as they arise out of the same First Information Report and both the petitioners are named accused in the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 13.08.2025 in connection with Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 617/2025, registered under Section 70(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of leaned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the victim is 70 years of age. He submits that the victim and one more witness have been examined before the learned court and both of them have turned

2026:JHHC:20755

hostile. He further submits that as per the evidence of the victim, she had gone to the police station as her Rs. 7000/- was missing and she has even refused to identify the petitioners.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has appeared and has submitted that the victim has turned hostile and she has no objection if the petitioners are enlarged on bail.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State also has nothing to say once the victim has turned hostile.

7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions and the victim having turned hostile, the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the leaned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj in connection with Barhait P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 617/2025, on the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioners.

(ii) The other bailor should be their close relative. (iii) The petitioners will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioners.

(iv) The petitioners will deposit a self-attested copy of their Aadhar Card along with their mobile number before the learned court which they will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

(v) The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court.

8. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

9. Let this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petitions be communicated to the court concerned through “FAX/email”.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

Date of Order:14.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:14.07.2026

2