2025:JHHC:15567 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2703 of 2025 ------ 1. Chandrakant Yadav @ Chandrakant Kumar, S/o Jay Prakash Yadav @ Prakash Yadav. 2. Pravin Yadav @ Praveen Kumar Yadav, S/o Sulochan Mahto. … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P. ----- 04/ 13.06.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Sarawan P.S. Case No.35 of 2025, for offences under Sections 191(2), 190, 132, 121(1) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that neither the Tractor nor the material which was loaded on the Tractor belongs to the petitioners. He submits that co-accused namely Saddam Ansari @ Md. Saddam Ansari and Nasim Ansari @ Md. Nasim Ansari, have been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.06.2025 in A.B.A. No.2983 of 2025. He further submits that all the Sections in this case are punishable for less than seven years. 4. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that notices to the 2025:JHHC:15567 petitioners were issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS on 26.03.2025 and 03.04.2025 but the petitioners are not cooperating at all. He further submits that the petitioner along with others have forcibly taken the Tractor when it was being seized by the police and they had also manhandled the police officials. 5. After hearing the parties and from the records, I find that there is an allegation against 20 - 25 persons that when the police seized a Tractor which has carried illegally excavated sand, they opposed the same, forcibly snatched the Tractor from the custody of the police and there was a scuffle between them and the police also. The chowkidar identified the petitioners to be accomplice. This fact is not reflected in order dated 03.06.2025, by which the co-accused have been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench. Further, the fact which has come to the notice of this Court through learned A.P.P., is that the petitioners in spite of Notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, have not appeared before the Investigating Officer. 6. Considering the nature of allegation and overall consideration of the aforesaid fact, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to these petitioners. 7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3