[2026:JHHC:16382] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9998 of 2025 Quayum Ansari @ Kayum Ansari, Aged about 55 years, S/o Abdul Rahman @ Jaguwa Ansari, R/o- Village- Masmano, P.O.&P.S.-Chanho, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Ms. Vani Kumari, Adv. For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, Addl.. PP For the informant : Mr. Pran Pranay, Adv. 06 / 08.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Chanho P. S. case no. 131 of 2024 (S.T. No. 610 of 2025) instituted under Section 118 (1), 118(2), 103(1), 61 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail as his earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.06.2025 passed in B.A. No. 3858 of 2025. It is next submitted that though the prayer for regular bail of the co-accused Tabrej Ansari was rejected vide order dated 05.12.2025 in B.A. no. 9067 of 2025 by this Court, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Crl.) No. 3885 of 2026 vide order dated 18.05.2026 has granted bail to the co- accused Tabrej Ansari. It is next submitted that the co-accused Noor Ansari has also been admitted to bail vide order dated 03.04.2025 in B.A. No. 2642 of 2025 and in her statement recorded under Section 180 of CrPC, the eye- witnesses of the occurrence i.e. daughter of the deceased namely Kumari Sujata Singh has stated that Abeet Ansari assaulted her father with an axe, Mumtaz Ansari assaulted her father with rod and Imtiyaz Ansari assaulted her father with rod and the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was also present and he was seen fleeing away from the place of occurrence, after the occurrence. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 12.10.2024, as mentioned in para 1 of this bail application but no witness has been examined as yet. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case and undertakes not to annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case, hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XII, Ranchi in connection with Chanho P. S. case no. 131 of 2024 (S.T. No. 610 of 2025) with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 08.09.2026 Smita/-