Honble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar disposed of a regular bail application filed by Tulsi Sao for offences under Section 302/201/34 B.N.S. 2023, rejecting the prayer due to circumstantial evidence and the grave nature of the crime.
Bail prayer rejected; applicant to remain in custody.
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:27369
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 6701 of 2026
Tulsi Sao, aged about 37 years, S/o Pyari Saw, R/o Village Doriyo, P.O. Aura, P.S. Bagodar, District Giridih, (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. Ayub Ansari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P.
05/Dated: 11th September, 2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. The applicant, who is in custody since 03.11.2025, has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T No.213 of 2026, arising out of Bagodar P.S. Case No.96 of 2022, registered for the offence under Section 302, 201/34 of the B.N.S, 2023, pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih.
3. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.03.2026 passed in B.A. No.1271 of 2026 and again vide order dated 15.05.2026 passed in B.A No.2490 of 2026.
4. It appears that the accused and the wife of the deceased were in an illicit relationship and they have done with away the deceased, who was the husband of one of the co-accused.
5. 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.
Innocence has been claimed by the learned counsel for the applicant and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the weapon of crime has been found on the basis of the confession of the co-accused person. There is no other material
2026:JHHC:27369
against this applicant, except confession. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made.
6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
7. From perusal of the records, it appears that there is a circumstantial evidence against this applicant.
8. Considering the nature of crime and 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.6701 of 2026
1 issue framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the applicant who is in custody for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the B.N.S. 2023.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tulsi Sao
The State of Jharkhand
RAJESH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
