( 2025:JHHC:11846 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3049 of 2025 ------ Urmila Devi @ Urmila Prasad, Aged about 69 years, Wife of Semen Prasad, Resident of Near Jag Vaishnavi Flat Kitadih, Church Road, Pokitadih, Parsudih, Post Office –Kitadih, Police Station –Parsudih, District –Jamshedpur, (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Manoj Kr. No.2, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21.04.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Parsudih P.S. Case No.165 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/238(a)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons has committed the murder of Arti Devi by assaulting her on her head. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the testimony of the eight year old daughter of the deceased that she saw the petitioner and others assaulting the deceased is highly improbable. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para -15 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of the deceased Arit Devi and keeping in view her access to the eye- witness of the occurrence being the eight year old daughter of the deceased; who is also the granddaughter of the petitioner; there is every chance of the petitioner tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of the deceased Arit Devi and the chance of her tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/