( 2026:JHHC:19835 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5179 of 2026 Mrinal Rudra, aged about 18 years, S/o Manish Jaiswal, R/o House No.31, Ward No.21, Brij Bihari Lane, PO- B. Deoghar, PS- Deoghar, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Dilip Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawin Kr. Singh, APP --- 04/06.07.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2025 in connection with Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No.547 of 2025 (S.T. No.77 of 2026) for the offence registered under Sections 281, 103 and 61(1) (b) of the B.N.S. 2023 and now the case is pending in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar. 3. Earlier bail application filed by the petitioner was withdrawn vide order dated 02.04.2026 passed in B.A. No.769 of 2026 as the charge was not framed and liberty was given to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail after framing of charge. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has been framed under Sections 105, 125(b) of the BNS, 2023. He has further submitted that petitioner was aged about 18 years at the time of accident. 5. The learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner was not having driving licence and he was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and dashed the deceased resulting in death of informant’s brother. 6. The learned counsel for the State further submits that the offence under Section 105 BNS, 2023 is a serious offence and minimum punishment prescribed is five years. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently without having driving licence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named ( 2026:JHHC:19835 ) on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected at this stage. 8. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 06.07.2026. Uploaded sandeep/-