2026:JHHC:14721 --1-- A.B.A. No. 1139 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1139 of 2026 ---- Ajay Kumar Mandal, aged about 30 years, son of Dukhu Mandal, resident of village – Suksena, Jamnighat, PO – Sarkanda, PS – Rajmahal, District – Sahibganj .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Advocate ---- 03/13.05.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No.174 of 2025 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 309(4), 115(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner has got no role in doing dacoity in the jewellery shop. He further submits that there are two Ajay Kumar Mandal in the case. He then submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.9 of the petition. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 2026:JHHC:14721 --2-- A.B.A. No. 1139 of 2026 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that there are serious allegations against the petitioner of doing dacoity in the jewellery shop. He further submits that it has come that the petitioner was main person in planning of the said crime and watching the area. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the petitioner is an accused of dacoity in a jewellery shop and in the investigation the name of the petitioner has come and it has also come in the case diary that the petitioner was also watching the movement of police where the jewellery shop is situated. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 13.05.2026 Sangam/