( 2026:JHHC:28991 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8958 of 2026 ------ Rohit Kumar Singh @ Rohit Singh, aged about 38 years, Son of Late Girija Shankar Singh, resident of Chutia, P.O. & P.S.-Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manjeet Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 25-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Thakurgaon P.S. Case No.45 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. This is the third journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail, as earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 01.07.2025 in B.A. No.3733 of 2025 and dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.05.2025 in B.A. No.1341 of 2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only fresh ground is that, in the meanwhile, PW-01-informant has been examined in this case, and he has supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that the petitioner has remained in custody since 13.02.2025 as has been mentioned in para-01 of this 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. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit and keeping in view of the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing cheating of Rs.22,55,000/-; only because the informant/victim has been examined but who has supported the case of the prosecution or for that matter, the petitioner has been in custody for some more time, is not a sufficient ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. It is then submitted that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of cheating of Rs.22,55,000/- and as the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner made was rejected on merit; the mere fact that the PW-01 has been examined, who has supported the case of the prosecution totally; as also the fact that earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit; the mere fact that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time, is not a sufficient ground to re-consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner which has already been rejected, hence, this Court is not inclined to admit the 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.) 25/09/2026 Abhiraj/