( 2026:JHHC:12447 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3440 of 2026 ------ 1. Ajit Pahan, aged about 29 years, S/o Late Sukhram Munda 2. Mahesh Pahan, aged about 26 years, S/o Sitaram Pahan Both are resident of Hahap, P.O. –Tetri, P.S. –Namkum, District –Ranchi. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Sourabh Kumar Das, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 28.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.261 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons have committed the murder of Manki Pahan by assaulting him with sticks and by thrashing him on the ground and also assaulting him with kicks and fist blows. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 23.09.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the co-accused person has already been admitted to bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 30.03.2026 in B.A. No. 2587 of 2026. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of committing the murder of the father of the informant namely Manki Pahan by beating him black and blue resulting in his death, there is every chance of the petitioners absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the chance of their absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 28.04.2026 Sonu/