[ 2026:JHHC:24300] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5238 of 2026 1. Narayan Gope @ Narayan Gop, Aged About 45 years, S/o Hakandu Gope, R/o-Vill-Sakin, Kuladurum, PO & PS- Bano, Dist- Simdega, Jharkhand. 2. Dilip Gope @ Dilip Gop, Aged About 36 years, S/o Hakandu Gope, R/o- Vill-Sakın, Kuladurum, P.O. & P.S.- Bano, Dist- Simdega, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners : Mr. Mohit Prakash , Adv. Mr. Vishal Kr. Srivastava , Adv. For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.. PP 03 / 13.08.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No. 26 of 2012 (B-II) arising out of Bano P.S. case no. 22 of 2009 (G.R. No.166 of 2009) instituted under Section 147, 148, 149, 302/120B of IPC, u/s 27 of Arms Act and 17 of C.L.A Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners was the member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, shot dead Manoj Sharma, Harinarayan Singh and Shibu Singh and the allegation against the petitioner no. 1 is that the petitioner fired one bullet from his rifle and the petitioners no. 2 fired two bullets from his refile upon Manoj Sharma resulting in his death. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the co-accused Lalit Baraik who faced the trial, has since been acquitted vide the judgment dated 01.04.2019 in S.T. case no. 26 of 2012 (B-1) and it transpired during the trial of the case that the informant has since died. It is next submitted that in this case, though two witnesses have been examined but both of them, have been declared hostile. It is next submitted that the petitioner has voluntarily surrendered on 10.11.2025. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl.. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that apart from the informant, Satan Horo is the eye-witness of the occurrence and altogether 13 prosecution witnesses are also there to be examined during the trial, hence, keeping in view of the serious allegations against the petitioners of committing murder of three persons in cold blood, there is every chance of the petitioners absconding, if released on bail and also there is chance of the petitioners tampering with the evidence. It is therefore submitted that the petitioners ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and as well as the chance of their tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioners be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above- named petitioners is rejected. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 13.08.2026 Smita/-