2025:JHHC:35661 --1-- A.B.A. No. 6700 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6700 of 2025 ---- 1. Manoj Tudu @ Manoj Kol, aged about 40 years, son of Ramlal Tudu, resident of village – Dhamni, PO and PS – Madhupur, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand 2. Rohit Tudu @ Rohit Kole, aged about 21 years, son of Rajendra Tudu, resident of village – Dhamni, PO and PS – Madhupur, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand 3. Vishal Kol @ Vishal Kumar, aged about 15 years, s/o Dinu Kol, resident of village – Jiyanpur, PO – Baracharpa, PS – Margomunda, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand 4. Kishan Tudu @ Kishan Kole, aged about 37 years, S/o Shanichar Kol, resident of village – Jiyanpur, PO – Baracharpa, PS – Margomunda, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand 5. Gita Devi, aged about 40 years, Wife of Dinu Kol, resident of village – Jiyanpur, PO – Baracharpa, PS – Margomunda, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand 6. Dinu Kole, aged about 42 years, S/o Gunjara Kol, resident of village – Jiyanpur, PO – Baracharpa, PS – Margomunda, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Satyanshu Shubham, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, Advocate ---- 02/28.11.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.43 of 2025, for the alleged offences 2025:JHHC:35661 --2-- A.B.A. No. 6700 of 2025 registered under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 333, 61(2)(b), 117(2), 324(6), 303(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Madhupur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are case and counter case between the parties and the scuffle took place due to land dispute. He further submits that there is no injury report and even the Investigating Officer has made several attempts for obtaining injury report of husband and son of the informant and the same was not made available. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the allegations are there against the petitioners of assault. 5. Considering that there are case and counter case between the parties and it has come in the order of learned Sessions Judge that in spite of several attempts made by the Investigating Officer the injury of the husband and son of the informant was not made available, I am inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of their surrender/arrest, the petitioners, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with 2025:JHHC:35661 --3-- A.B.A. No. 6700 of 2025 two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Madhupur in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.43 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 28.11.2025 Sangam/