( 2026:JHHC:26970 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8336 of 2026 ------ Ritu Tiu, aged about 25 years, Son of Kandeya Tiu, Resident of Village –Katmba, Goilkera, P.O. & P.S. –Goilkera, District – West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Birat Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 08.09.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 476 of 2023 arising out of Tonto P.S. Case No.21 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under sections 302/34 of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused –Jaipal Singh Deogam has committed the murder of Motka Deogam. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and only because Motka Deogam, the petitioner and the co- accused –Jaipal Singh Deogam were sleeping at night in the courtyard of the house of Dakuya and on the next morning, the petitioner and the co-accused –Jaipal Singh Deogam were not there, on that basis, suspicion was raised that the petitioner might have committed the murder of Motka Deogam. It is next submitted that no motive has been attributed to the petitioner for committing the murder of Motka Deogam; even though there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. It is further submitted that so far, only the informant has been examined as P.W.1 and except suspicion, he has not stated anything to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in the rejection order of the bail application of the petitioner dated 11.03.2026 in M.C.A. No. 174 of 2026. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.07.2023, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in connection with S.T. Case No. 476 of 2023 arising out of Tonto P.S. Case No.21 of 2016 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 08.09.2026 Sonu/