( 2026:JHHC:5109 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 237 of 2026 ------ Rijwan Ali @ Rijwan Khan Ali @ Rijwan Khon @ Rijwan Khan, aged about 24 years, son of Kurban Ali @ Quraban Khan, resident of Kocha Pakar Toli, Barda, P.O. & P.S.- Tapkara, Dist.-Khunti, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 20.02.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Tapkara P.S. Case No.08 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 317(5)/325/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 11 (1) (d)/ 11 (1) (e)/ 11 (1) (f)/11 (1) (a) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 and under Section 12 (1) of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition Slaughter Act, 2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a habitual offender involved in slaughter of bovine animals and he is also involved in three other cases of similar nature. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.10.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. It is lastly 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 petitioner is a habitual offender, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and 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 at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 20.02.2026 Gunjan-