[2026:JHHC:28357] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8769 of 2026 ------ Anjali Hembram, aged about 25 years, Wife of Konda Hembram, Resident of Village – Sirka Tola, Baridih, P.O. & P.S. – M.G.M., District – East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshay Kr. Mahato, Advocate Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated:-18-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with M.G.M. P.S. Case no. 149 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1525 of 2025 (S.T. Case No. 48 of 2026) registered for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 103(1), 351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. 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 12.06.2026 passed in B.A. No. 5216 of 2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, three witnesses have been examined and PW-1 who is the eye-witness of the occurrence has supported the case of the prosecution but besides PW-1, PW-2 & 3 have also supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the co-accused, with similar allegations, has already been admitted to bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.06.2026 passed in B.A. No. 4866 of 2026. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.10.2025 as mentioned in para- 19 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the serious allegation of direct nature against the petitioner of committing murder of Jagdish Hembram and the overwhelming evidence that has already come on record through the three prosecution witnesses examined during the trial of the case, 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 released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the evidence that has already come on record through the three prosecution witnesses examined by the prosecution during the trial of the case as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the above named petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:-18.09.2026 Saroj/