[2026:JHHC:16721] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5041 of 2026 ------ Kaila Manjhi, aged about 56 years, Son of Late Sibon Manjhi, R/o- Putkadih, Bazartand P.O. + P.S.- Mahuatand Dist-Bokaro, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party. ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 10-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahuatand P.S. Case No.01 of 2024 (S.T. No. 277 of 2024) registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of the I.P.C. This is the second journey of the petitioner for prayer for regular bail, as earlier regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.09.2025 in B.A. No. 7303 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile P.W.7 and P.W.8 have been examined. P.W.8 is the investigating officer of the case and he has proved the confessional statement of the petitioner which is marked as exhibit-P-5/P.W.-08. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the main allegation of murder is against Sulendra Kisku and Subhash Kisku. It is then submitted that charge has been framed and out of 13 charge-sheet witnesses, 08 witnesses have been examined. It is then submitted that the co-accused person with similar allegation has been admitted to bail vide order dated 07.04.2026 in B.A. No. 2785 of 2026. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as mentioned in para 13 and he has been in custody since 12.01.2024 as mentioned in para-06 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 Sessions Judge III Bermo at Tenughat, in connection with Mahuatand P.S. Case No.01 of 2024 (S.T. No. 277 of 2024)with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 10/06/2026 Amar/