( 2026:JHHC:9500 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2720 of 2026 ------ Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Pandey, aged about 31 years, s/o Om Prakash Pandey, r/o Shanti Nagar, Chatakpur, Kamre, P.O. & P.S.-Pandra, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Sunil Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 06.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.23 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 61 (2) /318(4) /109(1) /118(2) /351(2)/352/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under 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 and in criminal conspiracy with them attempted to murder the informant by firing upon him and the bullet hit the right arm of the informant and his brother Vikash Singh. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the genesis of the occurrence is related to dealing of land of area 36 decimals, in which the informant on the instruction of co-accused-Sanjay Pandey invested Rs.58,00,000/- to be paid to the land owners and after expiry of one and half years neither the sale deed in respect of the said land was executed in favour of the informant nor the money was refunded. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.01.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application and the main allegation is against the co-accused Sanjay Pandey. It is next 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, victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused persons with similar allegations have already been admitted to bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.03.2026 in B.A. No.2068 of 2026 and by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 in B.A. No. 2153 of 2026. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed 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 J.M. 1st Class-XXXI, Ranchi, in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.23 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the 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, victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 06.04.2026 Gunjan-