IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.4268 of 2024 ------ Md. Jishan Khan @ Jishan Khan, aged about 21 years, S/O Md. Samsuddin Khan, R/O Village- Kharagdiha, P.O.- Kharagdiha, P.S.- Jamua, District- Giridih .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the State : Ms. Amrita Kumari, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.09 Dated- 07-03-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.130 of 2024 registered under Sections 120B/205/209/419/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and his own brother namely Mubarak Khan were the accused persons of N.D.P.S. Case No.04 of 2023 in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Giridih and on 06.01.2024, the petitioner, in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons, made the co-accused Munna Kumar Sahani to impersonate as Mubarak Khan and the said Munna Kumar Sahani was also taken to judicial custody upon him representing to be Mubarak Khan and was consigned to the Central Jail, Giridih but upon the act of impersonation and forgery having been found out, an official complaint was lodged by the Assistant of the Sessions Court at Giridih, with the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih basing upon which the instant complaint being Complaint Case No.130 of 2024 has been registered. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has unnecessarily been dragged in this case. It is further submitted that no offence punishable under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner. It is also submitted that only because the petitioner is the brother of Mubarak Khan, he has been arrayed as an accused in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the prayer for regular bail of the co-accused Mubarak Khan and Munna Kumar Sahani have been rejected by co-ordinate Benches of this Court. It is next submitted that the conduct of the petitioner of being in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons having committed the offence; amounts to interfering with the smooth administration of justice and is a serious offence. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of being in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons, having committed the offence of forgery and cheating by impersonation as well as the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the trial of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above- named petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/