( 2025:JHHC:29495 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3961 of 2025 1. Lal Vijay Nath Sahdeo, aged about 57 years, 2. Uday Nath Sahdeo, aged about 51 years, and 3. Dhirendra Nath Sahdeo, aged about 47 years, All sons of late Babu Vishwanath Sahdeo and all residents of Dhumsa Toli, Ganpat Nagar, P.O.-G.P.O, P.S. Lower Bazar, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate 06/ 23.09.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 65 of 2025, registered under sections 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-IV, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that land appertaining to Khata No. 46, Plot No. 1128, 1130, 1355 and 1361 and Khata No. 106, Plot no. 1523 of Mouza Kokar, Badagai has been granted to the petitioners’ father vide Hukumnama in the year, 1945 by late Thakur Mahendra Nath Shahdeo, the grandfather of the present petitioners and based on the same, the jamabandi was opened in favour of Vishwanath Shahdeo i.e. the father of the petitioners and they have been paying the rent continuously after the abolition of Zamindari in the year, 1950. He further submits that petitioners are paying holding tax for the said parcel of land and to buttress this argument he refers to Annexure-3 which is holding tax receipt of the said land. He then submits that for another parcel of land another case has been lodged in which the petitioners have been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2667 of 2025. He then submits that for the said land a partition suit being Partition Suit No. 223 of 2010 is instituted by the petitioners which is pending. He then submits that suit for ( 2025:JHHC:29495 ) cancellation of deed has been instituted by the informant being O.S. No. 370 of 2021. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of manipulating Register-II and F.I.R has been registered against the officials of the Circle Office. 5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer and submits that manipulation was done in the Register-II at the instance of the petitioners. According to him petitioner’s name is Vijay Nath Sai and by way of erasing the ancestors’/petitioners’ name, he got inserted the name of the father of the petitioners as such there is clear cut case of cheating and forgery and in view of that privilege of anticipatory bail may not be granted. 6. It is an admitted position that for the land in question, there are partition suit and suit for cancellation of deed. One another F.I.R. was lodged in which the petitioners were granted anticipatory bail and allegations are made of manipulating Register-II however for cancellation of deed suit has been instituted which is pending. 7. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-IV, Ranchi, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 65 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.23.09.2025 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-