( 2026:JHHC:19111 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3655 of 2026 ------ Raja Singh, aged about 23 years, son of Virendra Singh, resident of Village-Samer Tand, P.O.-Shahpur, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Palamau. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. No.2, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 30-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No.309 of 2024 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No. 65 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 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 committed double murder i.e. of Sujit Bhuiyan and Rajesh Gupta by stabbing them. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the main allegation of stabbing is against Rama Choudhary, Sujit Chandravanshi and some others whereas the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was catching hold of the hand of the victims while the co- accused persons were stabbing them. It is further 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 lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 20.04.2024 as mentioned in para-12 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in view of the active role played by the petitioner in catching hold of the hands of the deceased persons while the co-accused persons were stabbing them; makes him squarely liable for the offence of murder itself and keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and 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 and 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.) 30/06/2026 Abhiraj/