[2026:JHHC:10735] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.883 of 2026 ------ Dinesh Khariya, aged about 26 years, s/o- Bachuwa Kharia, R/o Village- Fasiya, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla, District- Gumla, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Srivastava, Advocate Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Gaunjhu, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04/ Dated-15-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No. 215 of 2023, corresponding to S.T. Case No. 243 of 2024 G.R. Case No. 184 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147/148/149/302/201 of I.P.C. This is the third journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail as earlier vide order dated 11.02.2025, the petitioner had filed B.A. No.10231 of 2024 which was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court and again vide order dated 16.10.2025, the petitioner had filed B.A. No.7765 of 2025, the same was also rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that so far seven witnesses have been examined during the trial out of whom P.W.6 and P.W.7 have not supported the case of the prosecution but the rest of the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that since the trial is at its fag end, hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the P.W.1 to P.W.5 have supported the case of the prosecution and the same is sufficient to bring home the charge against the petitioner. Hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail in order to avoid the consequence of the severe sentence that is likely to be imposed upon him after his conviction. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 15.04.2026 Vedanti/