[2026:JHHC:17523] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5371 of 2026 ------ Sunny Lohra @ Sunny Karmali (24 Yrs.), S/o Sri Chotelal Lohra R/o present address Jail road Birsa Chowk, P.O, P.S. & District Ramgarh, permanent address Jhopar Patti Bazar, Dundi Bazaar, Sector 12, P.O. & P.S. Bokaro Steel City, Dist- Bokaro .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Jyotsna Mahato, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-17-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. No.43 of 2026 arising out of Ramgarh P.S. Case No.325 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No.113 of 2026 registered under Section 331 (5), 305, 317 (4) of the B.N.S, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed theft in the house of the informant when his mother was alone in the house and when the mother of the informant protested to the same, the petitioner and the co-accused namely Pintu Munda pushed the mother of the informant and looted huge amount of cash of Rs.12,00,000/-, gold and silver jewelries and L.I.C. papers. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that some of the silver ornaments seized from the petitioners, have not been named in the F.I.R. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing theft in the dwelling house of the informant and the petitioner is also involved in three other criminal cases, hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the 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, his criminal antecedent as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, 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 rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-17.06.2026-Animesh/