( 2025:JHHC:34639 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 6536 of 2025 1. Sahebi Yadav @ Sahebi Mahto @ Sehebi Yaav aged about 71 years, son of Sukhdeo Yadav @ Sukhdeo Mahto 2. Charki Devi @ Panwa Devi aged about 41 years, wife of Munna Bhuiyan 3. Mahendra Bharti @ Mahendra Bhuiyan age about 44 years, son of Dukhi Bhuiyan 4. Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav @ Sajay Kumar Yadav aged about 40 years, son of Bhunari Yadav @ Munari Yadav 5. Aruni Bharti @ Arun Bhuiyan, aged about 44 years son of Munna Bhuiyan 6. Mangar Bhuiyan @ Mangar Bharti @ Baleshwar Bharti aged about 34 years, son of Balehwar Bhuiyan 7. Ramchandra Yadav aged about 45 years, son of Bhunari Yadav @ Munari Yadav 8. Mutari Yadav @ Mutari Bhuiyan, aged about 40 years, son of Deonarayan Bharti @ Deonarayan Bhuiyan All above petitioners are resident of village Arjuna Khurd, Tola Tulsipur, Post Office and Police Station Hunterganj, District-Chatra (Jharkhand) ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Manish Yadav Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. 04/ 20.11.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 444 of 2020, registered under section 33 (1) (C) of Indian Forest Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false allegations are made that petitioners were constructing houses in the forest area. He further submits that the petitioners were constructing the houses in their own land. He then submits that the name of the petitioners have come in the confessional statement of the villager and the person who has taken the name of the petitioners, the name of that person has not been disclosed ( 2025:JHHC:34639 ) in the F.I.R. He also submits that petitioners have got no criminal antecedent which is disclosed in para 8 of the petition. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of constructing houses in the forest area. 5. Considering that the name of the petitioners has been taken by one of the villager and the person who has taken the name of the petitioners, the name of that person has not been disclosed in the F.I.R, the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent which is disclosed in para 8 of the petition and it has been pointed out that the petitioners were constructing their houses in their own land. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chatra, in connection with Complaint Case No. 444 of 2020, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.20.11.2025 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-