( 2026:JHHC:10168 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1373 of 2026 ------ Harendra Singh @ Harendra Kumar Singh, aged about 40 years, son of Late Suresh Singh, resident of Village Kumhwa, P.O. Kishunpur, P.S. Patan, District –Palamau, at present residing at Kanke Road, Bramchari Nagar, Behind Gokul Hotel, P.O. and P.S. –Kanke, District –Ranchi (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, Advocate : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Amit Raj, Advocate ------ Order No.03 Dated- 09.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No.274 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1), 111 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the co-accused persons who are the henchmen of the petitioner and with the pistol given by the petitioner to one of his henchmen –Abhishek Singh, Abhishek Singh fired upon the deceased –Vijay Kumar Nag who is the owner of a hotel, consequent upon a quarrel with him as a bone was found out in the Veg-Biriyani ordered by the co-accused persons in the said hotel of the deceased. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and it is the admitted case of the prosecution that that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. It is next submitted that there is specific allegation against the co-accused Abhishek Singh of firing upon Vijay Kumar Nag consequent upon a quarrel in his hotel relating to a bone being found in the veg-biryani ordered by the co-accused persons in the said hotel. It is further submitted that it is the admitted case of the prosecution that there was land dispute between the petitioner and the informant and because of the same, the petitioner has been implicated in this case only for wreaking vengeance. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.11.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 19 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 informant or 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. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Ranchi, in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No.274 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 09.04.2026 Sonu/