[2026:JHHC:12202] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3413 of 2026 ------ Aman Jha @ Aman Kumar Jha @ Aman Kr. Jha, aged about 28 years, son of Lalan Kumar Jha, resident of Kota Colony, Lakrakhanda, P.O. and P.S.- Bokaro Steel City, District- Bokaro. ... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 05 of 2026 arising out of Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No. 188 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1459 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2)(a) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed murder of the Ravi Kumar by slitting his throat. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there is no eye- witness to the occurrence. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.08.2025 as mentioned in para-12 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of the Ravi Kumar and leading to recovery of weapon of offence which is knife with which he killed Ravi Kumar and keeping in view of serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, 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 the chance of the petitioner absconding or 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.) 24/04/2026 Amar/