( 2025:JHHC:13241 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3322 of 2025 ------ Anil Kumar @ Anil Rajak @ Anil Kumar Rajak, aged about 27 years, son of Nand Kishor Rajak, resident of Village –Bonga, Sardam, P.O. and P.S. Pathalgadda, District –Chatra (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sahil, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 01.05.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Simariya P.S. Case No.187 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1), 238, 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 the deceased namely Priti Kumari and caused disappearance of evidence of the murder by throwing the dead body of the deceased. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and only because the petitioner is a close relative of the informant, he has been implicated in this case. It is next submitted that the petitioner resides at Pune. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.11.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 13 of the bail application. 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 fact that the direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of the deceased Priti Kumari; 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 and the chance of his 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/