[ 2026:JHHC:8349] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. no. 2290 of 2026 Kundan Singh @ Kundan Kherwar@ Sudhir Singh @ Kundan Jee, aged about 38 years, Son of Mahabir Singh, Resident of Village Maiel Matlong, P.O. & P.S.- Manika, District- Latehar (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurav Kumar , Adv. For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra , Addl. PP 02 / 23.03.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahuadanr P. S. case no. 20 of 2025 instituted under Section 308 (5), 308(4), 308 (7) and 3(5 ) of BNS, 2023 along with Section 17 of the CLA Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in organized crime of collection of levy and was involved in 35 other cases also. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not know that in how many cases he is in jail and in how many cases, he is on bail. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 16.07.2025, as mentioned in para 15 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegations against the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding, if released on bail and also there is chance of the petitioner tampering with the evidence. 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, his criminal antecedents and the chance of his tampering with the evidence and absconding, 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 23.03.2026 Smita/-