[2026:JHHC:27849] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5103 of 2026 ------ Markandey Singh Kuntia, Aged about – 47 Years, S/O- Late Vijay Singh Kuntia, Resident of Village- Saligutu, P.O.- Bevkela, P.S.- Muffasil, District- West Singhbhum .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate Mr. Bipin Bihari, Advocate Ms. Shipra Sonam, Advocate Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No.05 Dated-15-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.56 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 103(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 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 persons, committed murder of Sumit Singh Yadav and committed theft of his mobile phone. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that though the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. yet without putting him on Test Identification Parade as has been mentioned in paragraph-5 of the Supplementary Affidavit dated 03.08.2026, charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is next submitted that a prosecution witness who is the informant, has been examined, but he has not stated anything to implicate the petitioner in this case. it is further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused namely Madan Sharma. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and that he will not annoy or disturb 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 17.01.2026 as has been mentioned in para-14 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail and submit that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents but he is in custody in all those cases which are pending against him. 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.56 of 2025 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case, 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 will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-15.09.2026-Animesh/