( 2026:JHHC:14446 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 2216 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2216 of 2026 1. Sudha Baranwal, aged about 57 years, W/o Bijoy Baranwal @ Vijay Baranwal, resident of Lohar Kulhi, Saraidhela, near Dr. M. Prasad Clinic, Phuphuadi, P.O. & P.S. Saraidhela, District- Dhanbad 2. Bijoy Baranwal @ Vijoy Baranwal @ Bijay Baranwal, aged about 63 years, S/o Hargobind Lal Baranwal @ Hargovind Lal Baranwal, resident of Lohar Kulhi, Saraidhela, near Dr. M. Prasad Clinic, Phuphuadi, P.O. & P.S. Saraidhela, District- Dhanbad … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the State : Ms. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ----- 04/12.05.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.51/2023 (wrongly recorded as 23 of 2023), corresponding to G.R. Case No.2449/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 304B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad. 3. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners earlier moved before this Court in A.B.A. No.4232 of 2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.07.2023. He next submits that petitioner no.1 is the mother-in-law and petitioner no.2 is the father-in- law of the deceased. He then submits that after dismissal of the earlier anticipatory bail application, the police have submitted final form on 29.01.2025 and the petitioners have not been sent up for trial. He next submits that charge-sheet has been submitted only against the husband and ( 2026:JHHC:14446 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 2216 of 2026 the husband has faced the trial and he has been convicted. He also submits that after submission of final form, notices have been issued upon the informant and the learned Court differing with the final form, has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioners. He further submits that petitioner no.1 is aged about 58 years and she is affected with 40% visual disability and also locomotor disability and apart from this disability, petitioner no.1 is also suffering from other old age diseases such as diabetic, hypertension. To buttress this argument, he refers Annexure-6 of this application, which is a certificate issued by the doctor. He submits that petitioner no.2 was recently under treatment of paralytic attack and his left portion is under paralytic attack and the movement of the left portion of the body is very limited. He then submits that there is no doubt that the petitioners have earlier moved before this Court and their prayer for anticipatory bail has been rejected, however, in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, their prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be allowed. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the police have submitted final form against the husband, however, the learned Court has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that this is second anticipatory bail application and in view of that, their prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. He further submits that the chargesheet has been submitted on 29.01.2025 whereas the learned Court has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioners on ( 2026:JHHC:14446 ) -3- A.B.A. No. 2216 of 2026 08.07.2025 and the present anticipatory bail application has been filed on 30.03.2026. He next submits that even process under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners and in view of that, their prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 6. There is no doubt that the petitioners have earlier moved before this Court in A.B.A. No.4232 of 2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.07.2023. Subsequently, the police have submitted final form on 29.01.2025, whereby, the petitioners have not been sent up for trial and the learned Court, differing with the final form, has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioners. Annexure-5 is the medical prescription, which suggests that the deceased was suffering from psychotic depression and she was under treatment of Dr. Umesh Narayan Choudhary. 7. It is well-settled that second anticipatory bail application cannot be entertained in absence of any fresh ground. What has been stated herein above, it transpires that fresh grounds are there to entertain this second anticipatory bail application. Further, it has been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the informant that process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners, however, the learned Court has been pleased to issue summon vide order dated 08.07.2025, which clearly suggests that process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. is not in the way or in the mind of the learned Court at the time of taking cognizance against the petitioners. 8. Further, it is well-known that even after issuance of process under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C., in exceptional circumstances anticipatory bail application can be entertained. ( 2026:JHHC:14446 ) -4- A.B.A. No. 2216 of 2026 9. What has been stated herein above, it transpires that exceptional circumstance is made out to entertain this second anticipatory bail application. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 10. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.51/2023 (wrongly recorded as 23 of 2023), corresponding to G.R. Case No.2449/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 12th May, 2026 Ajay/