( 2026:JHHC:18908 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5855 of 2026 ------ Narayan Rai @ Narayan Rai Ghatwar, aged about 65 years, son of Bagul Rai, Resident of Village –Gundri, P.S. –Dhanwar, (Ghorthambha O.P.), P.O. –Arkhango, District –Giridih. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jay Prakash, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Nawin Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 29.06.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Dhanwar (Ghorthamba O.P.) P.S. Case No.117 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons attempted to murder the informant only because the informant protested the petitioner and the co-accused persons- who are the family members of the petitioner, for abusing the student of a school in the name and style of Gurukul Sikshalaya. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the allegation of assault upon the informant with the axe on the head of the informant is upon the son of the petitioner namely Prakash Rai and the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner made a loop with his towel (gamchha) and after putting the same on the neck of the informant pulled him while exhorting others to kill the informant. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –09 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 29.04.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 07 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner is an old man of 65 years. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is a threat to the law and order situation in the locality and is creating nuisance for the students of the school, hence there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the 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 if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 29.06.2026 Sonu/