( 2026:JHHC:18788 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5868 of 2026 ------ Vicky Mahato, aged about 29 years, s/o late Lalchand Mahto, r/o Village-Krishnapur Bondih, P.O. & P.S.-RIT, Dist.- Saraikella, State-Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnupad Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 29.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 12 of 2026 arising out of RIT P.S. Case No.70 of 2025 (G.R. No. 784 of 2025) registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of Kala Murmu. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and so far, five witnesses have been examined and all have supported the case of the prosecution and only the I.O. of the case is yet to be examined. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.10.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 07 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. 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 of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, 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, 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.) 29.06.2026 Gunjan-