[2026:JHHC:1173] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. no. 129 of 2026 Sunny Kumar Ram @ Sunny Ram, aged about 35 years, Son of Suresh Ram, Resident of Village- Talaiya Basti Word No.7, P.O.- Jhumri Tilaiya, P.S.- Tilaiya, District- Koderma. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Shiv Prasad ,Adv. For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan , Addl. PP 02 / 16.01.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No.324 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 117(2), 109(2), 126, 127(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer of regular bail and the earlier application of the regular bail was earlier rejected vide order dated 26.09.2025 in B.A. No. 8800 of 2025. It is next submitted that the only fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, the co-accused has been admitted on bail. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted on regular bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view of serious allegation against the petitioner of attempting to commit murder of Phool Devi by assaulting on her head causing grievous injury on her head, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail and accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is again rejected for the same reasons as in the earlier order dated 26.09.2025 in B.A. No. 8800 of 2025. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 16.01.2026 Smita/-