( 2026:JHHC:21836 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6838 of 2026 ------ Altaf Sheikh @ Altab Sheikh @ Altaf Ansari, aged about 19 years, son of Late Rashid Sheikh, resident of Village Teshratand, P.O.- Latani & P.S.-East Tundi, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 23-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.400 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.3365 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 304 & 109 of the BNS, 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 rejected vide order dated 12.03.2026 in B.A. No.44 of 2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time. 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. 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 there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of attempting to murder the informant by snatching her valuables kept in her bag while she was travelling in an auto rickshaw, due to which she fell down and sustained injuries and the prayer for bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit. It is then submitted that 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 as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail and also the fact that earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit and the mere fact that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time, is not a sufficient ground to re-consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner which has already been rejected, hence, 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.) 23/07/2026 Abhiraj/