( 2026:JHHC:13880 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3674 of 2026 ------ Shankar Lohra @ Kade, aged about 21 years, s/o Panda Lohra, resident of Village-Ghaghra, P.O.-Birbanki, P.S.-Arki, Dist.-Khunti … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate : Mr. Randhir Kr. Sharma, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 08.05.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 106 of 2023 arising out of Arki P.S. Case No.64 of 2022 (G.R. No. 171 of 2023) registered for the offences punishable under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court consequent upon the failure of the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the copy of the deposition of all the witnesses examined in the case during the trial within the peremptory stipulated time. It is then submitted that the petitioner then filed Cr.M.P. No. 3095 of 2025 but the same was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons committed the murder of two persons. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and though witnesses have been examined but the same has been suppressed from this Court. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.01.2023, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused persons have already been admitted to bail. 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 the allegation of the co-accused persons who have been admitted to bail stands on a different footing than this petitioner and the witnesses examined during the trial have supported the case of the prosecution hence, deliberately the petitioner has withhold the deposition of the witnesses examined during the trial from this Court. It is further submitted that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against him in the evidence on record that has already come against him. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the fact that the petitioner has not come to Court with clean hands by suppressing the deposition of the witnesses already examined during the trial as also the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, 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. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 08.05.2026 Gunjan-