( 2026:JHHC:28528 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5526 of 2026 ------ Narayan Gope, aged about 45 years, S/o Hakandu Gope, R/o Village-Kuladurum, P.O. & P.S.-Bano, District-Simdega, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Srivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 21-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Spt S.T. Case No.82 of 2025 arising out of Basia P.S. Case No.21 of 2007 registered for the offences punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. 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 persons has committed murder of the son of the informant namely Deepak Sahu. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that apart from this case, petitioner is involved in another case; as has been mentioned in para-03 of the Supplementary Affidavit dated 10.08.2026. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.12.2025, 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. It is also submitted that 02 witnesses have been examined in this case who have supported the case of the prosecution, but has not taken the name of the petitioner, 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 Sanjay Sahu and Charitra Sahu are the eye witness to the occurrence and they are yet to be examined in this case, hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail and also his criminal antecedent, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 21/09/2026 Abhiraj/