2026:JHHC:21900 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6420 of 2026 Sunil Munda @ Bharat Jee, Son of Sri Kuleshwar Munda … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, Advocate Ms. Pragati Prasad, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. shashi Kumar Verma, Advocate --- 04/24th July 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Burmu P.S. Case No. 03 of 2025 for the offence registered under Section 308(3),/308(4),/308(5),/61(2) of BNS, Section 25(1-A),/25(1-B)(a),/26/35 of Arms Act and Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XIII-cum-Special Judge-III, CBI (Other than AHD, Ranchi. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected thrice earlier on merits, but there has been serious procedural lapse in the seizure, inasmuch as, the provision of Sections 100 and 105 of BNSS has not been complied and seizure list does not bear the signature of the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner has as many as 13 criminal antecedents as mentioned in the bail petition itself and earlier the bail applications of the petitioner were rejected on merits. There is recovery of fire arms from his waist and further recovery of fire arms were also alleged. The trial is going on and as per the records, five witnesses have 2026:JHHC:21900 2 already been examined so far. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner happens to be the TSPC Area Commander, operating under Sub-Zonal Commander Arvind Ji and is involved in the alleged offence. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the bail applications of the petitioner were rejected thrice earlier on merits and that the trial is going on and the petitioner has as many as thirteen criminal antecedents including the present one, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 5. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 24.07.2026 Uploaded On: 25.07.2026 Mukul/-