Dismissed¶13

Nirmal Oraon v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Jul 2026B.A./6430/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:20631); B.A. No. 6430 of 2026; regular bail application dismissed by Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.; accused Nirmal Oraon (husband of deceased) charged under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) B.N.S. 2023 (murder; common intention), Tandwa P.S. Case No.51 of 2026, Chatra; custody since 14.02.2026; death of spouse within one year of marriage; alleged dowry demand of Rs.10 lakhs; plea that tribal community has no concept of dowry rejected as irrelevant; keywords: bail rejection, BNS 2023, Section 103(1), Section 3(5), dowry demand, tribal custom, murder accused.

What did the court decide?

Considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. ¶12

Nirmal Oraon Vs State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:20631)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6430 of 2026

¶3

Nirmal Oraon, aged about 19 years, son of Chunu Oraon @ Chundu Oraon, resident of village- Suiyatand, P.O. & P.S.- Tandwa, District- Chatra.

¶4

… … Petitioner

¶5

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

¶6

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Shekhar Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.

¶7

¶8

02 /08.07.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶9

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2026 in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No.51 of 2026, for the offences registered under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Chatra.

¶10

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the parties belong to tribal community who do not have concept of dowry. He has further stated that the deceased was six years and five months elder to the petitioner and they have a daughter and the petitioner has to take care of the daughter.

¶11

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the deceased died within one year of marriage and there is direct allegation of demand of Rs.10 lakhs.

¶12

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The other arguments of the petitioner that the parties are tribal and there is no concept of dowry, has no bearing in the matter.

¶13

6. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶14

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

¶15

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶16

Dated: 13.07.2026 Uploaded on 13.07.2026

¶17

Jay/

¶18