( 2026:JHHC:11740 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3252 of 2026 ------ Shailesh Kumar @ Shailesh Kumar Sahu, aged about 43 years, s/o late Sitaram Sahu, r/o Village-College Road, P.O. +P.S.- Lohardaga, Dist.-Lohardaga, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate : Ms. Shabina Perween, Advocate : Ms. Sunita Kumari, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Bharno P.S. Case No.40 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 109/118(2)/3(5)/61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 27(2) of Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail and earlier the prayer for bail was rejected vide order dated 07.01.2026 in B.A. No. 9186 of 2025. It is then submitted that the only fresh ground is that trial has not yet been commenced. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the mere fact that the petitioner has been in custody for some more time is not a ground to reconsider the prayer for regular bail; which has already been rejected on merit, keeping in view the severity of the allegation against the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and as the prayer for bail has already been rejected on merit, this Court is of the considered view that the ground that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more days is not sufficient to release the petitioner on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in the order dated 07.01.2026 in B.A. No. 9186 of 2025. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 22.04.2026 Gunjan-