[2026:JHHC:5417] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.374 of 2026 ------ Raja Choudhary @ Raju Mahtha @ Raju Kumar Mahtha, aged about 21 years, Son of Bhulu Mahtha, Resident of Barmasia, Circular Road, Barmasia Chowk, P.O. & P.S.- Deoghar, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jeet, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated- 24-02-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No.504 of 2025 registered under Section 310 (2) of the B.N.S, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with co-accused persons committed dacoity and looted mobile phones from the victim. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been identified in the Test Identification Parade. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.11.2025 and was in unauthorized police custody of four days. It is also submitted that the test Identification Parade has not been held in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has also been filed in this case. It is also submitted that case-diary has been called for in respect of the bail application of the co-accused persons. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation against the petitioner of serious nature of committing dacoity and having been identified in the Test Identification Parade as well as the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as his criminal antecedent as also chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated- 24.02.2026-Animesh/