( 2026:JHHC:21262 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6655 of 2026 ------ Abhinav Sourabh @ Abhinav, aged about 25 years, S/o Dhirendra Kumar Pathak, resident of Cooperative Colony, P.O.-Hazaribagh G.P.O., P.S.-Korrah, District Hazaribagh (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kr. Deo, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.08 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 308(3) & 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner demanded extortion and looted Rs.3,69,000/- kept in the dicky of the vehicle of the informant. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and petitioner has been identified in the TIP. It is also submitted that the petitioner is also involved in two other cases as mentioned in the rejection order of the bail application of the petition by the learned court below. 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 20.01.2026 as mentioned in para-01 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 keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been identified in the TIP and in view of his criminal antecedents, 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.) 18/07/2026 Abhiraj/