( 2025:JHHC:30340 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8711 of 2025 ------ 1. Pancha Devi, aged about 42 years, wife of Sri Bajo Yadav @ Bajo Mahto @ Baijnath, resident of Dhakodih, P.O.- Tapowan, P.S.-Kunda, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand 2. Bajo Yadav @ Bajo Mahto @ Baijnath, aged about 55 years, son of late Hari Mahto, resident of Dhakodih, P.O.- Tapowan, P.S.-Kunda, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Prabhat Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 26.09.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 184 of 2025 arising out of Kunda P.S. Case No.66 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/238(a)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention has committed the murder of their grandson namely Shivansh and also committed disappearance of the evidence of the murder by throwing the dead body in a waterbody. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the main allegation is against the petitioner no.1 and there is no allegation against the petitioner no.2. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 inhumane conduct of the petitioners in killing their own seven-month-old grandson, there is every chance of the petitioners committing similar type of offence and also there is every chance of the petitioners absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioners be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 26.09.2025 Sonu/Gunjan-