( 2026:JHHC:1118 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10433 of 2025 ------ Vipin Kumar Yadav @ Bipin Kumar Yadav, aged about 28 years, son of Pramod Yadav, resident of Simrsot, P.O.- Kukahi, P.S.-Haidarnagar, Dist.-Palamu, PIN-822115 (Jharkhand) … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Alok Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.05 Dated- 16.01.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 212 of 2025 arising out of Haidarnagar P.S. Case No.72 of 2024 (G.R. No. 114 of 2025) registered for the offences punishable under sections 80/238/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail and earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 08.07.2025 in B.A. No. 5484 of 2025. It is next submitted that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, the petitioner has been in custody for some more months. 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 merely because the petitioner has been in custody for some more months that itself is not a fresh ground to review the order of the regular bail of the petitioner which has already been rejected. It is next submitted by learned Addl. P.P. that keeping in view the direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of making persistent dowry demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in lieu of that, a gold chain and as the undisputed fact remains that the deceased died within seven years of her marriage, otherwise than under normal circumstances, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding, if released on bail and also there is chance of the petitioner tampering with the evidence. 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 not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in the order dated 08.07.2025 passed in B.A. No. 5484 of 2025. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 16.01.2026 Sonu/Gunjan-