( 2026:JHHC:17991 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3784 of 2026 ------ Feku Bhuiyan @ Sarvanash Ji, aged about 33 years, son of Pusan Bhuiyan, resident of Village-Kuriyam Khurd, P.O. & P.S.-Balumath, Dist.-Latehar … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.03 Dated- 19.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 54 of 2025 arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No.203 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under sections 147/148/149/387/120B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 25(1-A)/25(1-B)a/26/35 of Arms Act, Section 25(6)/25(7) of the Arms Amendment Act and under Section 17 of C.L.A. Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail and earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected and the petitioner is a habitual criminal and is involved in extremist activity and is also involved in 13 other cases apart from this case. It is next submitted that in this case the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being member of unlawful assembly; in prosecution of the common object of the assembly committed extortion at the point of fire arms. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and though the petitioner prayed for six weeks’ time to file a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the latest order sheet of each of the cases in which the petitioner is involved apart from this case, the same could not be filed as the petitioner has not yet been remanded in other cases in which he is involved. 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 the petitioner is a threat to law and order situation in the locality and keeping in view his conduct in not getting himself to be remanded in other cases as well as his criminal antecedent, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to 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, as also his criminal antecedent, 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.) 19.06.2026 Gunjan-