Jharkhand High Court
B.A./8640/2026 of BUDHRAM SOY Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 7 October 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8640 of 2026 Budhram Soy aged about 46 years S/o Bale Soy R/o Vill Kitahatu, P.O. & P.S. Saiko, District - Khunti … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS.
2026:JHHC:30046
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 8640 of 2026
Budhram Soy aged about 46 years S/o Bale Soy R/o Vill Kitahatu, P.O. &
P.S. Saiko, District - Khunti
…
…
Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…
… Opp. Party
---
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner
: Mr. Rabindra Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party
: Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, Adv.
---
04/7th October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Saiko P.S. Case No. 08/2026 for the offence registered under Section 103(1)/238(a)/3(5) of BNS, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge at Khunti.
2. The counter-affidavit filed during the court proceedings is taken on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 27.05.2026, charge has been framed on 10.09.2026 and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Though it is a case of double murder by tangi, but the assailant was another co-accused, namely, Sumber Singh Manki and the only allegation against the petitioner is that he has assisted in concealing the dead body and other material evidence in the forest. The learned counsel submits that the co-accused, namely, Gomeya Soy has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 8554/2026 vide order dated 15.09.2026.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the blood stained cloth and murder weapon, that is, tangi were also recovered on the confession of the petitioner along with the
2026:JHHC:30046
dead body of two deceased persons. The learned counsel has referred to paragraph 16 of the counter-affidavit.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is recovery of two dead bodies and other materials on the confession of the petitioner including the murder weapon, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected.
6. So far as the bail to the co-accused, namely, Gomeya Soy is concerned, the same is on different footing, inasmuch as, a submission was made that except the confessional statement, there was no other material in the record to connect Gomeya Soy with the alleged offence.
7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Dated: 07.10.2026
Uploaded On: 08.10.2026
Mukul/-