( 2026:JHHC:18579 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5714 of 2026 ------ Amarjeet Jee @ Lakhan Yadav @ Tingu Jee (57 yrs), S/o Late Moti Yadav, r/o Village Gadhtari, Tola Naktiya, P.O. & P.S.-Barachatti, Dist.-Gaya (Bihar). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Fulkali Devi (28 yrs), w/o Late Rajkumar Singh Bhokta, r/o Village-Teletanr, P.O. & P.S.-Dhangai, Dist.-Gaya (Bihar). .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jyotsna Mahato, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No.344 of 2024 arising out of Rajpur P.S. Case No.18 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 of the Arms Act and under Section 17(i)(ii) of CLA Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly armed with deadly weapons including the fire arm committed murder of Rajkumar Singh @ Rajkumar Singh Bhokta by firing upon him on the allegation that he is the middleman of police. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has involved in 31 other cases. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 14.06.2023 as is evident from para-01 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation against the petitioner of being member of an unlawful assembly and member of an extremist organization being MCC and having committed murder of the deceased, 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 or 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.) 24/06/2026 Abhiraj/