Dismissed¶14

Abhishek Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Jun 2026B.A./5186/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected; bail application dismissed; BNS 2023 offences Ss. 331(4), 305, 326(g), 238, 316(2), 61(2), 324(5), 3(5); theft of Rs.56,000/- from hotel; set fire to hotel/arson; common intention with co-accused hotel manager; Golmuri P.S. Case No.43 of 2026; investigation ongoing; three other cases; chance of absconding and tampering with evidence; serious nature of allegation; petitioner Abhishek Singh; State of Jharkhand opposite party; Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi; Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.; order dated 12.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence if released on bail, this is not a fit case where the petitioner be admitted to bail at this stage; the prayer for bail is rejected. ¶14

Abhishek Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:17074 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5186 of 2026

¶2

Abhishek Singh, aged about 35 years, son of Ranjeet Singh, resident of House No. 34, Indra Nagar, P.O.-Agrico, Bhalubasa, P.S.-Sitaramdera, Jamshedpur, Dist.-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Avnish Prakhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl. P.P.

¶8

------

¶9

Order No.02 Dated- 12.06.2026

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Golmuri P.S. Case No.43 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 331(4)/ 305/ 326(g)/ 238/ 316(2)/61(2)/324(5)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person has committed theft of Rs.56,000/- from the hotel of the informant and set fire to the hotel causing severe damage in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused manager of the hotel itself. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is involved in three other cases apart from this case. It is next submitted that the investigation of the case is going on. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶13

The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the 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 lastly submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail.

¶14

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be admitted to bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected.

¶15

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶16

12.06.2026

¶17

Gunjan-

Abhishek Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balendra Ganjhu @ Ajit @ Paledar Kumar Bhogta Alias Palendra Kumar Bhogta Vs State of Jharkhand

Pushpa Devi Alias Pushpa Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shankar Turi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vipul Karmakar Alias Vipul Lohar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gola Mian Alias Gulam Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shankar Tirkey Alias Shankar Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand