[2026:JHHC:11986 )] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3360 of 2026 ------ Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Kumar Pawa Son of Rajendra Prasad, aged about 47 yrs, resident of Q. No. H.B. 57 Adarsh Nagar, Dhurwa, Ward No. 39, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Angara P.S. Case No. 89 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 322, 336(2), 338, 340(2), 61(2), 336(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has got created forged power of attorney purportedly to have been executed by the informant in his favour and by using such forged power of attorney he sold the land of the informant to someone else by adopting deceitful means. It is next submitted that the co-accused persons have been granted bail. It is next submitted that the petitioner is involved in another case, the details of which has not been furnished by the petitioner in this bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 26.09.2025 as mentioned in para-12 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the allegations against the co-accused persons, who has been granted bail stand on different footing as against them there is no allegation of impersonation and further submits that keeping in view the direct allegation against the petitioner that he has made the forged power of attorney and got it executed in his favour by impersonation and there is every chance of the petitioner absconding or 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 at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 22/04/2026 Amar/