{ 2026:JHHC:16676 } IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4345 of 2026 ------ Raj Kumar @ Gajju @ Gullu, aged about 17 years, son of Raju Kumar @ Raju Ram @ Raju resident of village-Ward No. 3, Kali Muhaal Dudhi, P.O. and P.S.- Dudhi, Dist- Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh-231208, Aadhar no. 5872 1058 0037. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Robin Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrr. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P. ------ Order No: -02 Dated: -09-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Nagar Untari P.S. Case No. 184 of 2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 311, 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed robbery along with the co-accused person and snatched away the bag of the informant containing Rs.35,000/to 40,000/-. It is next submitted that the co-accused persons Roshan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar Ram has been granted regular bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court during the vacation after false submission was made by him that no T.I. parade has been held, even though page-33 of the brief goes to show that the informant Dipak Kumar Soni has identified the co-accused Roshan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar Ram in the T.I. parade. It is next submitted that the petitioner has also been identified in the T.I. parade by the informant, but since the co- accused person has been admitted bail on the principle of parity, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. 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 petitioner has been in custody since 19.01.2026 as mentioned in para-18 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the State will take step for cancellation of regular bail of Roshan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar Ram who has been admitted to bail vide order dated 02.06.2026 in B.A. No. 4817 of 2026 during vacation, as he has been granted bail by misleading the Court by making the submission that no T.I. parade was held; though, in fact on 02.02.2026, as per the T.I. chart, kept at page 33 of the brief, it is evident that he has been identified by the informant. It is next submitted that the keeping in view the serious nature of offence leveled against the petitioner and in view of overwhelming materials available against him including him being identified in the T.I. chart; there is every chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on 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 not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 09/06/2026 Amar/