( 2026:JHHC:25849 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8015 of 2026 ------ Jeki Kalindi @ Jeki Dom @ Jaiki Kalindi @ Jaiki Dome, aged about 34 years, S/o Radha Kalindi @ Radha Dom, R/o Railway Colony, Krishna Basti, Near Badka Field, P.O. & P.S. –Balidih, District –Bokaro, Jharkhand -827010. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate : Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 27.08.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 71 of 2026 arising out of Balidih P.S. Case No.351 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 127(1), 127(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109, 303(2), 324(4), 117(2) and 118(1) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly attempted to murder the informant and his family members only because they protested the drug abuse and gambling indulged in front of their house by the petitioner and the co-accused persons. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –11 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that so far five witnesses have been examined in this case and all of them have supported the case of the prosecution and keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 27.08.2026 Sonu/