( 2026:JHHC:19203 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5727 of 2026 ------ Amit Kumar Dubey @ Amit Kr. Dubey, aged about 29 years, Son of Late Santosh Dubey, resident of Village –Chaneya, P.O. –Basna, P.S. –Vishramnpur, District –Palamau, Jharkhand -822124. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Subodh Kr. Dubey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 01.07.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Patan P.S. Case No.155 of 2025, S.T. No. 33 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 140(1), 109, 118(1), 118(2), 303(2) r/w 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order 02.04.2026 in B.A. No. 1194 of 2026. 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 abducted the informant and looted mobile phone and cash of Rs.1,500/- and also attempted to murder the informant by slitting his neck and both hands with a sharp edged blade. It is also submitted that the petitioner was identified to be the person who was slitting the throat, forearm and wrist of the victim. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.09.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application. It is next submitted that charges have been framed on 19.02.2026 as has been mentioned in para-14 of the bail application. 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during 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 and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of causing injury in a brutal manner upon the informant and the fact that he has been identified in the Test Identification Parade, 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 and tampering with the evidence, 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.) 01.07.2026 Sonu/