1 A.B.A. No. 4602 of 2025 2025:JHHC:30579 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4602 of 2025 ---- 1.Nayeemuddin @ Md. Nayeemuddin aged about 64 years son of late Majid Mian 2.Mustak Ansari @ Md. Mustak aged about 37 years son of Md. Nayeemuddin 3.Saddam Ansari @ Md. Saddam Hussain @ Saddam Hussain aged about 33 years son of Nayeemuddin 4.Asgar Ansari @ M. Asgar Ansari @ Md. Asgar aged about 40 years son of Salamat @ Lato Mian 5.Sajrul Ansari @ Md. Sajrul aged about 35 years of son of Salamat @ Lato Mian 6.Nanku @ Md. Akbar aged about 40 years son of Salamat @ Lato Mian 7.Abda Khatoon aged about 32 years wife of Md. Mustak 8.Tamana Praveen aged about 25 years wife of Saddam Hussain 9.Nuresha Khatoon aged about 34 years wife of Md. Asgar 10.Rubi Khatoon aged about 31 years wife of Sajrul Ansari 11.Sahina Khatoon @ Sahina aged about 35 years wife of Nanku @ Md. Akbar 12.Sahar Bibi aged about 63 years wife of Md. Nayeemuddin All resident of Village Lal Bazar PO and PS Dhanwar District Giridih .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Shri Nivas Roy, Advocate For the State :- Mrs Amrita Sinha, Advocate ---- 3/26.09.2025 Heard learned counsels for petitioners and for State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No.280 of 2023, for offence registered under section 341, 323, 324, 325, 448, 354, 379, 504, 506/34 of the IPC, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that entire family members have been made accused and even lady family members have not been spared. He then submits that for the alleged occurrence, the 2 A.B.A. No. 4602 of 2025 petitioners side first lodged the FIR and thereafter after nine days the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioners and there are general and omnibus allegations are there, against the petitioners. He next submits that injury is there, but it is not clear as to from whose blow such injury has been taken place by the father of the informant. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that injury has been received by the father of the informant. 5. Considering that there are case and counter case and firstly the case has been lodged by the petitioners’ side and the present case has been lodged nine days after the FIR has been lodged by the petitioners’ side and even lady members of the family have not been spared and it is also not clear as to from whose blow such injury has been received, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners. 6. Accordingly, petitioners, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before learned court within three weeks from today, and in event of their surrender/arrest, petitioners, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of like amount each, to satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Giridih, in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No.280 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 26th Sept., 2025 SI/