[2026:JHHC:16359] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.935 of 2026 ------ Raju Kumar Yadav @ Raju Yadav, aged about 30 years, S/O- Khublal Mahto, R/O Village- Domuhani, P.O. + P.S.- Madhupur, District- Deoghar. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.05 Dated-08-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Devipur P.S. Case No.82 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.874 of 2025 registered under Section 309 (4) of the B.N.S, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in commission of robbery and looted mobile phone and cash of Rs.16,500/- on the point of pistol. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been identified by the informant in the Test Identification Parade conducted during the investigation of the case. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-22 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.07.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the overwhelming evidence that has come against the petitioner during the investigation of the case, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing robbery and his being identified in the Test Identification Parade as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above- named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-08.06.2026-Animesh/