Jharkhand High Court
Rahul Mandal @ Rahul Kumar Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand … … Opposite … on 15 April, 2026
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
2026:JHHC:10615
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1898 of 2026
Rahul Mandal @ Rahul Kumar Mandal, Son of Biseshwar Mandal
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party
---
CORAM :HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
—
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate
: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, APP
—
Lastly heard on 13.04.2026
05/15.04.2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
is in custody since 15.10.2025 in connection with Hirodih P.S. Case
No. 115 of 2023 registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379,
120B and 504 of Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act. He submits that cognizance has been taken under
sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 498A, 504/34 of Indian Penal Code and
sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the case is now
pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate- 1st Class, Giridih.
2. The brother of the informant is alleged to have suffered injury
from sharp cutting weapon (knife) at the hand of the petitioner
(husband of the informant) and when Dilip Mandal, a co-villager
came to rescue, he also suffered injuries in his hand by the knife. The
incident had taken place in the matrimonial home of the informant. It
is alleged that there was demand of Rs. 1 lakh and one vehicle for
which the informant was being assaulted and tortured from time to
time.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
has been wrongly implicated in this case. The petitioner is husband of
the informant. He has submitted that the marriage was solemnized on
12.07.2016 and First Information Report alleging demand of dowry
and torture has been lodged on 18.10.2023. The petitioner was in
custody since 15.10.2025 and was granted provisional bail by a co-
2026:JHHC:10615
ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.03.2026.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter submitted that the
nature of allegation was primarily relating to offence under section
498-A of Indian Penal Code. So far as allegation under section 307
IPC and other sections of Indian Penal Code are concerned, there is
serious doubt about the injury report of the brother of the informant,
who is alleged to have been assaulted by the petitioner with knife. He
refers to the injury report and has submitted that the injured has not
been examined in government hospital and was admitted in Crest Care
Hospital, Jamua without any information to the police of Jamua about
the alleged assault of knife. He submits that the date and time of
examination of injury has been mentioned in the injury report as
04.10.2023 at 04:00 P.M. but in the case diary at para- 77, 78, 79,
there is specific mention that the occurrence had taken place on
04.10.2023 at 18:30 hours, that is 6.30 P.M. It is submitted that there
is apparent contradiction which shows fabricated injury report.
Further, the certificate issued by Pulse Hospital, Ranchi, where the
brother of the informant was said to have been treated also does not
mention about any injury report. FIR was lodged after 14 days of the
occurrence.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand,
has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the present case is not a
simple case of demand of dowry and torture, rather the brother of the
informant-wife is said to have suffered grievous injuries.
6. The marriage was solemnized on 12.07.2016. As per the
allegation, soon after marriage, the husband along with in-laws started
torturing the informant- wife on account of non-fulfillment of demand
of dowry, money and vehicle. They called her ‘witch’ and took away
her Stridhan. It has also been alleged that Rahul Mandal (petitioner –
husband) assaulted his brother-in-law with knife causing serious
injuries and he was treated in Crest Care Hospital, Jamua from where
he was referred to Ranchi and the treatment of brother of the
informant-wife was going on. It has also been alleged in the FIR that
one Dilip Mandal also suffered injury from knife during the incident
2
2026:JHHC:10615
when he came for rescue.
7. No specific date and time of injury upon brother of the
informant and Dilip Mandal has been mentioned in the FIR. However,
in restatement, the informant has stated that the alleged incident had
taken place on 04.10.2023 at about 18:00 hours (06:00 P.M.) and also
stated that no document was prepared with regard to treatment of
Dilip Mandal. The injury report of the brother of the informant shows
that he was examined on 04.10.2023 at 04:00 P.M. and his statement
was recorded by the police only on 03.11.2025.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances including
delay in filing the FIR and mis-match with respect to the injury report
when compared with the time of incident and also that the charge
sheet has already been submitted, the petitioner is entitled to bail.
9. Consequently, provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide
order dated 13.03.2026 is confirmed. However, the petitioner shall
furnish fresh bail bond within 10 days from today of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate- 1st Class,
Giridih in connection with Hirodih P.S. Case No. 115 of 2023, on the
following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall not disturb the informant in any manner
whatsoever.
(ii) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the
petitioner.
(iii) The other bailor should be his close relative.
(iv) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and
on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the
bail bond furnished by the petitioner.
(v) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar
Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he
will not change during the pendency of the case without prior
permission of the court.
(vi) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings
before the learned trial court.
3
2026:JHHC:10615
10. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.
11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court
concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Date of Order:15.04.2026
Pankaj
Date of Uploading:15.04.2026
4
