2025:JHHC:32333 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5992 of 2025 1Seraj Ansari @ Md. Seraj @ Md. Beraj, S/o Kamruddin Ansari 2.Gaffar @ Gaffar Ansari @ Md. Jiyaul Haque, S/o Sattar Ansari 3.Md. Sonu @ Sarfaraj Ansari, S/o Jalil Miya All R/o Village Dumraun, P.O. and P.s. Ichak, District Hazaribag (Jharkhand) .... Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party(s). …… CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwini Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, AddI. P.P. …...... 02/ 17.10.2025: This is second attempt of filing of anticipatory bail application by the petitioners. 2. By filing this application, the petitioners pray for grant of anticipatory bail in terms of Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, as the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No. 30 of 2025, for offences under Sections 191(1), 192, 190, 132, 196, 299, 293, 326(f), 326(g), 324(5), 125(a), 125(b) and 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned J.M. 1st Class, Hazaribag. 3. Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. 4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. 5. On the earlier occasion on 16.06.2025, this Court has rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail by a reasoned order. 6. Now the petitioners submits that some of co-accused has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail, later on by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 7. From the argument of the petitioners, I get a indication that petitioners want a review of the order dated 16.06.2025, passed in A.B.A. No.3266 of 2025. Though it is second anticipatory bail, but in fact it is by way of review, based on a subsequent order passed by a co-ordinate Bench. This is not within the jurisdiction of this Court. What the petitioners are praying cannot be granted as in Criminal jurisdiction, the Court does not have a power to review. Further a subsequent order passed by co-ordinate Bench cannot change the earlier order which was passed earlier. The initial order can be said to be a precedent, but subsequent order cannot be said to be a precedent to review or recall the earlier order. 8. Therefore, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 17th October, 2025 R.S./