[2026:JHHC:25115] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7808 of 2026 ------ Deepak Singh @ Dipak Singh, aged about 35 years, son of Late Balmiki Singh, resident of Goshala Nala Road, Near Shitla Mandir, P.O. and P.S.- Jugsalai, Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Avnish Prakhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P Ms. Malsi Pathak, AC to P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated-20-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No.42 of 2026 registered under Section 25(1-B) (a), 25 (6), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in firing upon the owner of a shop and in connection with said occurrence of firing, Jugsalai P.S. Case No.39 of 2026 was registered. The co-accused Abhishek Shrivastava @ Abhishek Raj @ Aryan and Baneshwar Namta @ Khokha @ Manas were apprehended in the said case. From Abhishek Shrivastava @ Abhishek Raj @ Arjan one country-made pistol along with magazine and one live cartridge and one more country-made pistol along with magazine and live cartridge and yet another country-made pistol with three live cartridges were recovered i.e., in total three country-made pistols and cartridges were recovered which were kept hidden under the bushes behind a closed waste cycling plant. The co-accused Baneshwar Namta led to recovery of one country-made pistol and one live cartridge which was provided by inter alia the petitioner and the petitioner used to keep the fire-arms and used to give them to the co-accused persons whenever they need to use the fire-arms and the petitioner supplied the fire-arms to the co- accused persons for the firing incidence upon the shop owner. There is further allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner is running an organized crime syndicate and used to demand extortion from the businessmen. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been granted bail in one out of the seven cases in which he is involved apart from this case. It is next submitted that the co-accused namely Sanky Gohel @ Sankey Gohel has been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 10.08.2026 passed in B.A. No.7452 of 2026. It is also submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.07.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is a hardened criminal having seven criminal antecedents including the cases of murder and theft, hence, he is a threat to the law-and-order situation in the locality. It is further submitted that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the 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, his criminal antecedent as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-20.08.2026-Animesh/