IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.272 of 2025 ------ 1. Lalu Ansari @ Lalu Miyan, S/o Samsuddin Ansari, Aged about-43 years, Village Bankudih. 2. Sahadat Miyan @ Sahadat Ansari, S/o- Karim Mian, aged about- 56 years, Village- Kolhar, Both of P.O. & P.S.- Narayanpur, District- Jamtara .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22-01-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Narayanpur P.S. Case No.55 of 2023 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 379, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have committed theft of the cow of the informant and illegally slaughtered the cow and on being asked by the informant, the petitioners along with the co-accused persons being members of an unlawful assembly, variously armed, took away the motorcycle and snatched the silver chain of the informant and attempted to murder him by assaulting him and throttled his neck. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that with an intent to cause religious disharmony, this false case has been foisted. It is next submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2023 but till now no warrant of arrest or proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners. It is next submitted that the police personnel have also instituted a case against the petitioners for having used criminal force against the public servant police personnel, in discharge of their duty, in which case, the petitioners are on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners are threat to the law-and-order situation in the locality and they even used criminal force against the police personnel when police went to arrest them. It is therefore submitted that considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation to find out the details of the case and the whereabouts of the co-accused persons and also for recovery of the looted articles, the petitioners ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners, requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case as well as their criminal antecedent, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the abovenamed petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/