( 2026:JHHC:25615 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7942 of 2026 ------ Abdul Rahman Khan @ Arman Khan @ Bangali, aged about 19 years, son of Md. Arshad Khan, resident of Village Jalwabad, Post Office-Koderma, Police Station-Koderma, District-Koderma, (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 25-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Koderma P.S. Case No.154 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed theft of Rs.30,000/- for which this FIR has been registered, but earlier occasions also he committed theft of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively and the petitioner could be seen in the CCTV Camera installed in the house. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is also submitted that the petitioner is also involved in 04 other cases. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.12.2025 as has been mentioned in para-01 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is a hardened criminal and he has been identified in the CCTV footage, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail and in view of his criminal antecedents. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail as well as his criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 25/08/2026 Abhiraj/