Jharkhand High Court
B.A./2818/2026 of VINOD SINGH Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 11 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2818 of 2026 ---- Vinod Singh, aged about 34 years, S/o Rameshwar Singh @ Rajan, R/o Village Ichabar, Tala, Tikuuliyatar, P.O. and P.S. Latehar, Dist.-Latehar …. …. Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand
2026:JHHC:27363
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 2818 of 2026
----
Vinod Singh, aged about 34 years, S/o Rameshwar Singh @ Rajan, R/o Village Ichabar, Tala, Tikuuliyatar, P.O. and P.S. Latehar, Dist.-Latehar
….
….
Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
….
….
Opposite Party
----
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----
For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s)
: Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Sonal Sodhani, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Agrwal, Adv.
For the State
: Mr. Praful Jojo, A.P.P.
----
08/Dated: 11.09.2026
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. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the State.
2. The applicant, who is in custody since 29.11.2025 has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 269 of 2022 arising out of Latehar P.S. Case No. 02 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 14 of 2015(S), for the offence under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Latehar.
3. Earlier prayer for bail of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in B.A. No. 1766 of 2026.
4. 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.
5. Innocence has been claimed by the learned counsel for the applicant and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. It has been submitted that he is facing split-up trial. It has further been submitted that the other co- accused who has faced the trial (in S.T. No.124 of 2025), have already been acquitted. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made.
6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
2026:JHHC:27363
Page | 2
B.A. No.2818 of 2026
7. Acquittal of co-accused is not a finding regarding the guilt of other co- accused. The applicant is facing split up trial and his participation in trial is doubtful.
8. Considering the above facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at present. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants is, hereby, rejected.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Dated 11.09.2026 Pawan/Uploaded 14.09.2026