[2025:JHHC:19117] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5722 of 2025 ------ 1. Kangres Chatter, Aged about – 34 Years, S/o- Tengru Chatter Resident of Village- Parsa, P.O. + P.S.- Majhgaon, District- West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, Jharkhand. 2. Chandra Mohan Chatter, Aged about – 29 years, S/o Late Tangru Chatter, Resident of Village- Aarsa, P.O.+P.S.- Manjhgaon, Dist- West Singhbhum, Chaibas, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-14-07-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Majhgaon P.S. Case No.19 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.310 of 2024 (Sessions Trial Case No.365 of 2024 and Misc. Criminal Application No.644 of 2025) registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1), 238, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner has committed murder of Bablu Chatar. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the informant has not taken the name of the petitioners in the deposition as PW-1. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 22.08.2024 as is evident from para-13 of the instant bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that PW-5 who is the eye- witness of the occurrence has stated about the petitioners assaulting Bablu Chatar resulting in his death. It is next submitted that in view of overwhelming evidence, there is every chance of the petitioners absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and chance of their absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/