2026:JHHC:12420 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 113 of 2026 ------ Rana Paswan, son of Kali Paswan, resident of Village & P.O. Belchampa, P.S. Garhwa, District Garhwa .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawin Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ------ 02/28.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rehla P.S. Case No. 99 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 103(1), 352 and 351(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. By way of referring FIR, he submits that in the first part of the FIR, allegations are made against three persons and the charge sheet has been submitted against only two persons and Ranjit Kumar has not been sent up for trial. He further submits in the later part of FIR, the name of this petitioner has come and the allegations are there of assault by way of hard substance. He next submits that even grandmother of the deceased has also stated in paragraph 23 of the case diary that Panchayti was held for pacifying both sides however, both sides not settled the dispute at all and she has also stated that thereafter, the informant side came to the door of the petitioner side. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the injury is on the head and that is due to assault by hard substance. He submits that allegations are there against the petitioner assaulting the victim by Lathi and Danda. He also submits that head injury has been found and thereafter, the deceased has died. 5. Considering that in the FIR itself, it is alleged that the petitioner along with others have assaulted the deceased and the injury is found to be on the head and in pursuant to that, the decease has died, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Anit Uploaded 29.04.2026