( 2025:JHHC:31357 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6092 of 2024 ------ Shahjahan Bibi @ Shahajaha Bibi, aged 53 years, wife of Mohammad Azam, r/o Village-Chhatarpur, P.O.-Kalyanpur, P.S. & Dist.-Garhwa … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Divyansh Krishna, Advocate : Mr. Apurv Krishna, Advocate For the State : Mr. Praful Jojo, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 10.10.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Garhwa P.S. Case No.583 of 2021 (G.R. No. 762 of 2022) registered for the offences punishable under sections 457/380 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner during the occasion of chhath festival committed theft from the house of the informant and took away cash of Rs.8,000/- and a gold earring and from the house of Reema Kumari, the petitioner has committed theft of Rs.10,000/-, gold earring, chain, payal and jewelry worth Rs.60,000/-. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is also involved in three other cases of similar nature as mentioned in the supplementary affidavit. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 26.05.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused- Shamshad Ansari who was in custody since 11.03.2022 was granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.09.2024 in B.A. No.7399 of 2024. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and his criminal antecedent, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as his criminal antecedent, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 10.10.2025 Sonu/Gunjan-