Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9229/2026 of SUJIT CHOURASIA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 1 October 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9229 of 2026 Sujit Chourasia, aged about 22 years, S/o Pradip Chourasia, R/o Gorakhpuri Camp Kenduadih Alkusha, P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Kenduadih, District Dhanbad … … 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:29606
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9229 of 2026
Sujit Chourasia, aged about 22 years, S/o Pradip Chourasia, R/o Gorakhpuri Camp Kenduadih Alkusha, P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Kenduadih, District Dhanbad
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, APP
---
05/01.10.2026
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Kenduadih P.S. Case No.09 of 2024, corresponding to G.R. Case No.1060 of 2024 (S.T. Case No.360 of 2024), registered under Sections 302/392/397/411/34 of IPC, now pending in the court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge – XI, Dhanbad.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected twice earlier in B.A. No.9227 of 2024 vide order dated 29.10.2024 and thereafter in B.A. No. 7474 of 2025 vide order dated 29.08.2025. He submits that by the time of the last rejection order, only 4 witnesses were examined and they have not supported the prosecution case, but still the bail application of the petitioner was rejected. Now one more witness has been examined, who has also not supported the prosecution case.
4. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2024, only 3 witnesses remain to be examined and petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Considering the period of custody of the petitioner, it is submitted that he may be released on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as mentioned in the last rejection order itself, the petitioner was apprehended and, on his confession, looted jewelry and murder weapon has been recovered. He submits that the petitioner 2026:JHHC:29606
may not be enlarged on bail at this stage.
6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merits and the trial is in progress, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.
7. However, the State is directed to ensure that the remaining 3 witnesses are promptly produced before the court.
8. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance.
9. It is further observed that if the prosecution witnesses are not produced, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after 6 months.
10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:01.10.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:01.10.2026