( 2026:JHHC:16641 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5004 of 2026 ------ Anand Kumar @ Anand Kumar Singh, aged about 28 years, son of late Anil Kumar, resident of Street No.6, Near Red Roj School, Devi Mandap Road Hesal, P.O. & P.S.-Pandra, Dist.- Ranchi … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vijoy Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 10.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No.48 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 310(2)/111(2) (b)/111(4) of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 25(1-B) (a)/25(1-AAA)/35/27(1) of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the co-accused persons were committing dacoity in the jewellery shop of the informant at Chitarpur and in the midst of looting the gold jewelleries, the petitioner along with one Subhasni Ansari have been apprehended by the jewellery shop owner and his family members. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and he is the purchaser of the gold jewellery. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case because of mistaken identity. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.24 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.04.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 07 of the bail application. 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 keeping in view the direct allegation against the petitioner of being member of gang of dacoits headed by Vibhash Paswan and he has been caught red handed while committing dacoity, hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is lastly 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. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 10.06.2026 Gunjan-