Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9253/2026 of OM PRAKASH KUMAR @ LALUA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.9253 of 2026 ------ Om Prakash Kumar @ Lalua, aged about 25 years, son of Lalbabu Saw, resident of Joshi Colony, Gate No.03, P.O. & P.S.- Harla, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....
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.
[2026:JHHC:29675] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.9253 of 2026
------ Om Prakash Kumar @ Lalua, aged about 25 years, son of Lalbabu Saw, resident of Joshi Colony, Gate No.03, P.O. & P.S.- Harla, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nishant Kr. Roy, Advocate
For the State
: Ms. Mohua Palit, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated-05-10-2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Harla P.S. Case No.181 of 2025 (S.T. Case No.164 of 2026) registered under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of two deceased persons of the case. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that so far four witnesses have been examined and the P.W.3 and the P.W.4 in their examinations-in-chief in paragraphs-6 and 5 respectively, have stated that the petitioner and Bittu have committed the murder the of the deceased persons but they are not the eye-witnesses to the occurrence. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 04.12.2025. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in the testimony of P.W. 3 at paragraph-6 and para-5 of the P.W.4 wherein they have categorically stated that it is the petitioner and Bittu have committed murder of the two deceased persons of the case, and such testimony has not been challenged in their respective cross-examination in any manner and the consequence is that the same is accepted to be true and the same is sufficient to bring home the charge against the petitioner and in view of serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail.
Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail as also the evidence that have already come on record against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above- named petitioner be released on bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-05.10.2026-Animesh/