IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1577 of 2025 ------ Ismail Ansari @ Ismai Ansari, aged about 44 years, Son of Babujan Ansari, Resident of Bora Pahari, P.O.- Harladih, P.S.- Khokhra, District- Giridih .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 10-03-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.22 of 2024 registered under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, in criminal conspiracy with the co- accused persons, has committed the murder of one Rani Devi to avoid repayment of Rs.1,50,000/- taken on loan by him from Rani Devi and with the purpose of causing of disappearance of the evidence, has threw the dead body of the said Rani Devi in a jungle. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that except suspicion, there is no other material in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is further submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-07 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner 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 keeping in view of the direct allegation against the petitioner of having committed the murder of Rani Devi and causing disappearance of the evidence of the murder by throwing the dead body of the deceased in a jungle, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the case. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing the murder of Rani Devi and causing disappearance of the evidence of the murder by throwing the dead body of the deceased in a jungle as well as the requirement of custodial interrogation of the petitioner during the investigation of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/