2026:JHHC:14360 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2419 of 2026 ---- 1.Ayub Ansari @ Md. Ayub, aged about 46 years, son of Idris Miyan 2.Daud Ansari @ Md. Daud Ansari, aged about 43 years, son of late Khalil Ansari @ Md. Khalil 3.Asgar Ansari @ Mohmmad Asgar Ali, aged about 34 years, son of Tohir Hussain 4.Lal Mohammad aged about 45 years son of Halim Mian @ Abdul Halim 5.Firoj Ansari, aged about 32 years son of Usman Mian @ Usman Ansari All residents of Village Khariyodih, PO Ghoranjee, PS Deori, District Giridih, Jhrakhand 6.Samsad Ansari @ Md. Samsad Ansari, aged about 32 years, son of Lukman Ansari @ Lukman Mian, resident of Village Khuripanan, PO and PS Jasidih, District Deoghar, Jharkhand .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State :- Mrs Rashmi Kumari, Advocate ---- 2/12.05.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioners and for State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bengabad PS Case No.66 of 2025, for offence registered under section 126(2), 115(2), 127(2), 140(3), 304(2), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners and one Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan are the co-villagers and the relative of Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan has lodged the case against the family of Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan. He next submits that daughter of Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan has lodged the case against the informant and his family members being Bengabad PS Case No.126 of 2024 under section 127(2), 115(2), 85, 351, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and initially the complaint case was filed against the family members and even the petitioners have been made accused 2026:JHHC:14360 2 only being the co-villagers and the said complaint was further converted into the FIR and later on there was the order of the learned court and even no injury is there upon the body of the informant. He next submits that wife of the accused person including Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan have been granted anticipatory in ABA No.637 of 2026 and on these grounds, anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that allegations are there of forcibly taking away the informant by the petitioners and others. 5. Considering that earlier the daughter of Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan has lodged the case against the informant and his family members being Bengagad PS Case No.126 of 2024 and thereafter the informant has lodged the case against Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan and other family members and the petitioners are the co-villagers and they have been also made accused and Mansur Ansari @ Mansur Miyan and others have been granted anticipatory bail as aforesaid, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before learned court within two weeks from today, and in event of their surrender/arrest, the petitioners, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, in connection with Bengabad PS Case No.66 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 12.05.2026 SI/