[2026:JHHC:22157] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3857 of 2026 ------ Gurma Mandi, aged about 22 years, S/o Late Ramesh Mandi, R/o – Charikol, P.O. Lacchipur, P.S. Patamda, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Kr. Verma, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated-27-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Patamda P.S. Case No. 15 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1132 of 2025 (S.T. Case No. 464 of 2025) registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of Jira Mandi. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that so far, three witnesses have been examined in this case but all of them have supported the case of prosecution. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.06.2025 as mentioned in para-24 of the instant bail application. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-23 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of direct allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of Jira Mandi and the fact that three witnesses, who have been examined in this case during the trial, have supported the case of the prosecution; there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of direct allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 27.07.2026 Saroj/