[2026:JHHC:16387] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11971 of 2025 Akhtar Ansari aged 42 years, S/O-Idrish Ansari, R/O- Vill- Murmu,Makka, PO-Jobang, PS-Jobang, Dist- Lohardagga Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kr. Verma , Adv. For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha , Addl.. PP 04 / 08.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Latehar PS Case No 15/2024 corresponding to S. T. Case No 174/2024 registered u/s 395 /397 of I.P.C. 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 rejected vide order dated 18.03.2025 passed in B.A. No. 10 of 2025. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed dacoity and looted cash of Rs. 20,000/- and other articles from the informant. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner is not named in the FIR but he was identified by the informant in the TIP and the informant has supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 08.05.2024, as mentioned in para 1 of this bail application. 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 hence, the petitioner be admitted to regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the trial is at its fag end and seven prosecution witnesses have been examined were supported the case of the prosecution, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding as well as tampering with 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 as well as the chance of his tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail, 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 again rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in the order dated 18.03.2025 passed in B.A. No. 10 of 2025. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 08.09.2026 Smita/-