(2026:JHHC:9578) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2750 of 2026 Mangru Bhuian, aged about 55 years, son of Nanhu Bhuiyan, resident of village Barwadih, PO – Lamipatra, PS – Pandwa, District – Palamu (Jharkhand). … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 06th April, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with S. T. Case No. 326 of 2024, arising out of Dhurki P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under sections 302, 201, 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of his wife Ful Kumari @ Pavitri Devi. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that eight witnesses have been examined and they have supported the case of the prosecution. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.05.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 7 of the bail application. It is next submitted that trial is at the fag end. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of committing murder of Ful Kumari @ Pavitri Devi and attempted to murder Bablu Bhuian and overwhelming evidence that has come against the petition during trial of the case; in which eight witnesses have been examined so far, 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 be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Aditi