( 2026:JHHC:10461 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.1828 of 2026 ------ Raj Kumar Sharma @ Raju Sharma, aged about 38 years, son of Late Jagdish Prasad Sharma, permanent resident of Pir Baba Chowk, Galai Para, Bharo Gali, P.O. + P.S. & District-Sambhalpur, Orissa. At present resident of Rana Pratap Nagar, Near Joda Mandir, Tenant of Birendra Kumar Singh, P.O. & P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-10-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No.140 of 2025 arising out of Chas P.S. Case No.01 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) & 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail, earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 09.07.2025 in B.A. No.5581 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, five witnesses have been examined and all of them have supported the case of the prosecution except PW-5, but there is no eye witness to the occurrence., hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on 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 direct allegation against the petitioner and the overwhelming evidence that has come during the trial of the case, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and also the evidence that has come against him during the trial, the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 10/04/2026 Abhiraj/