( 2026:JHHC:4402 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 863 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 863 of 2026 Rajiv Ranjan Kumar, aged about 37 years, son of Hareshwar Singh, R/o L-24, Argora Housing Colony, P.O. & P.S. Argora, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate ----- 03/17.02.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Argora P.S. Case No.216/2024, registered for the offence under Sections 126, 115, 118, 109, 352, 125, 351, 324, 3 of the BNS, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are case and counter case between the parties. He further submits that the altercation took place due to land dispute. He then submits that both the sides have received injuries. He next submits that it is not a case under Section 109 of BNS. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and informant jointly opposed the prayer and submit that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of beating the informant. They further submit that the injury is also found to be grievous in nature and in view of that, the prayer for anticipatory of the petitioner may kindly be rejected. ( 2026:JHHC:4402 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 863 of 2026 5. From the FIR, it transpires that there is direction allegation of assault against the petitioner. The injured received several cut injuries on head and face and the report is there that the injury is grievous in nature. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, as such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected. 6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 17th February, 2026 Ajay/