[2026:JHHC:20998] THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5846 of 2026 ------ Barnabas Surin, aged about 60 years, Son of Samuel Surin, Resident of Village- Doyanger, P.O. + P.S.- Raniya, District-Khunti, (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party. ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. S.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl. P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated- 15-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Rania P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 132 of 2026 and Sessions Trial No. 65 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner files supplementary affidavit. Keep the same in the record. 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 committed murder of Manbodh Sahu by assaulting him only because he chased the co-accused -Abhishek Longa whom he saw with his daughter. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner that as to on which part of the body of the deceased, the petitioner assaulted. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 04.01.2026 as mentioned in para-01 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P., on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view of direct allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of Manbodh Sahu and 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 and there every 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.) 15/07/2026 Amar/