( 2026:JHHC:11335 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3198 of 2026 ------ Badal Kumar, aged about 23 years, son of Mannu Prashad Keshri, resident of House No. 31, Jhoushagadi, P.O. & P.S.- Deoghar, Dist.-Deoghar … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 322 of 2025 arising out of Kunda P.S. Case No.168 of 2025 (G.R. No. 1252 of 2025) registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed the murder of Kaushal Kumar Jaiswal. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is not named in the FIR and after his arrest he led to recovery of a knife. It is also submitted that in the meanwhile four witnesses have been examined, P.W.2 and 4 have turned hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution and even though the prosecution put leading questions to them still they did not support the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that P.W.1 has only stated that the petitioner threatened the deceased that he will see him after the deceased intervened in a quarrel between the petitioner and Chintu Keshri and slapped the petitioner twice. It is then submitted that except suspicion, there is no material in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is then submitted that there is no scientific evidence to connect the knife which was allegedly led to recovery by the petitioner, with the alleged crime as no report from the FSL has been obtained as yet, though four witnesses have already been examined in this case. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.17 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.09.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 19 of the bail application. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb 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 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 Sessions Judge, Deoghar, in connection with S.T. No. 322 of 2025 arising out of Kunda P.S. Case No.168 of 2025 (G.R. No. 1252 of 2025) 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 witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 18.04.2026 Gunjan-