[2026:JHHC:21465] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6834 of 2026 ------ Bachu Mahto, aged about 59 years, Son of Kameshwar Mahto, Resident of Village-Sewati, P.O. -Kaji Pakri, P.S.-Tarhasi, Dist- Palamau. .... .... …. Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party. ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, Advocate. Mr. Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Mohua Palit, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Tarhasi P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed murder of Raj Deo Mahto. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and he has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of Santosh Mahto and the alleged axe and cot used in commission of murder has been seized from the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no material in the record to show that any serological examination of the blood stain from the axe, was conducted to relate the same to the deceased – Raj Deo Mahto. It is then submitted that except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no other material to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is lastly submitted the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 12 of the bail application and has been in custody since 17.03.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 11 of the bail application. Charge-sheet has also been submitted against the petitioner, but none of the witnesses have been examined. It is next 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 or 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. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Palamau, in connection with Tarhasi P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 21/07/2026 Amar/