( 2026:JHHC:17582 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3394 of 2026 ------ Bimal Gope @ Takla, aged about 20 years, S/o-Vishnu Gope, R/o Chhaya Nagar, Dangi Medical, Near M.G.M., P.O. & P.S.- Sitaramdera, Town-Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Faisal Allam, Advocate ------ Order No.03 Dated- 17-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No.233 of 2025 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No.11 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons has committed murder of Santosh Singh. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the informant is not the eye witness to the occurrence. It is further submitted that though it has been specifically mentioned in the FIR that Rohit Dixit and the petitioner were chasing the deceased with fire arm, but it has not been mentioned as to who fired upon the deceased. It is also submitted that the co-accused persons have been granted bail. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-29 of this bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view, the serious nature of allegations against the petitioner of chasing the deceased with fire arm and firing upon him and ultimately the deceased having died of fire arm injuries, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and 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 as well as 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. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 17/06/2026 Abhiraj/