[2026:JHHC:25645] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7933 of 2026 ------ Bittu Kamad @ Bittu Kamat @ Sagar Kamat, aged about 27 years, son of Sri Parmeshwar Kamat, resident of Scrap Yard Road, Jojobera, P.O. & P.S.- Govindpur, 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. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-25-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 127 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 224 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2026 passed in B.A. No. 2204 of 2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of Sunil Singh. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, the eye-witness to the occurrence who has been examined as PW-1 has been declared hostile and has not supported the case of the prosecution rather he has stated that he has not seen who fired upon Sunil Singh and even though the prosecution put leading question to him, he did not support the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that son of the deceased who is the informant of the case, has also not supported the case of the prosecution nor identified the petitioner during his deposition in the case and he has also been declare hostile and he did not support the case of the prosecution even after his cross-examination. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.12.2024 as mentioned in para-14 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 127 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 224 of 2026 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 25.08.2026 Saroj/