B.A./9413/2026 of PUNIT ORAON Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 8 October 2026

( 2026:JHHC:30172 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.9413 of 2026

------ Punit Oraon, aged about 27 years, S/o Sri Budheshwar Oraon, R/o Village-Makunda, P.O.-Bargaon & P.S.-Sisai, Dist.-Gumla, Jharkhand.

.... .... …. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

.... .... .... Opposite Party

------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate

: Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P

------

Order No.02 Dated- 08-10-2026

Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sisai P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No.137 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 238 & 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons has committed murder of Budharam Tirkey and caused disappearance of the evidence of the murder by hiding the dead body of the deceased in the forest. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of his confessional statements of the co-accused persons namely Ranthi Devi and Sitaram Oraon. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-11 of this bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.01.2026 as mentioned in para-01 of the instant bail application. It is also submitted that charge sheet has been submitted in this case, and so far three witnesses have been examined, who have supported the case of the prosecution and have stated about the extra-judicial confession made by the co-accused Ranthi Devi. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that besides the extra judicial confession, the weapon of offence has also been recovered from the co-accused persons of the case and keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of Budharam Tirkey, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of having committed the murder of Budharam Tirkey, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, hence, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 08/10/2026 Abhiraj/