[2026:JHHC:12269] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1793 of 2026 Raju Prajapati @ Raju Kumar, aged about 40 years, S/o Jodha Kumhar, R/o Village-Huranali Manatu, P.O. and P.S. Chatra, District-Chatra. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mrs. Nivedita Kundu, Advocate. For the State : Mr. A.P. Topno, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 27.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 191(2)/191(3)/190/333/126(2)/115(2)/117(2)/303(2)/326(f)/ 326(g) /103(1)/61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this court in A.B.A. No. 7000 of 2025, which was subsequently withdrawn with the liberty to move before the learned court by way of filing the regular bail. She next submits that in the meantime, the other co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail. She further submits that fresh ground is there, in view of that the second anticipatory bail application has been filed. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that by the order dated 06.02.2026, the petitioner has withdrawn the earlier anticipatory bail application with the liberty [2026:JHHC:12269] -2- to move before the learned court by way of filing the regular bail application and there is no fresh ground to entertain the second anticipatory bail application. 5. It transpires that the petitioner has earlier moved before this court in A.B.A. No. 7000 of 2025, which was subsequently withdrawn with the liberty to move before the learned court by way of filing the regular bail and observation was also made that the said regular bail will be considered in accordance with law without being prejudice to the order. Further in absence of any fresh ground, the present anticipatory bail petition has been filed. 6. In view of the above, no fresh ground is made out to entertain this anticipatory bail application. As such, this petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-27.04.2026 Amitesh/-