( 2026:JHHC:25369 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7858 of 2026 ------ Rajesh Mandal, s/o Dwarika Mandal, aged about 34 years, r/o Basgohra, P.O.-Naitand, P.S.-Dumri, Dist.-Giridih … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Modi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate : Mr. Raja R.S. Singh, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21.08.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Dumri P.S. Case No.65 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1)/61(2)(a)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons and in criminal conspiracy with them has committed murder of Basudev Mandal. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and though the informant poses himself to be the eye witness of the occurrence but he is not the eye witness of the occurrence. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been framed in this case because of land dispute between the petitioner and the informant party. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 25.06.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct eye witness account of the informant against the petitioner of having committed murder of Basudev Mandal by repeatedly assaulting with lathi, danda and stones along with co-accused persons, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of direct allegation against the petitioner and 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 abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 21.08.2026 Gunjan-