2026:JHHC:14237 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7302 of 2025 ------ 1. Indu Devi, aged about 50 years, wife of Dadan Singh, resident of Village Gaji Bihra, P.O. Pansa, P.S. Mohammadganj, District Palamau, Jharkhand 2. Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Singh, son of Dadan Singh, resident of Village Gaji Bihra, P.O. Pansa, P.S. Mohammadganj, District Palamau, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, aged about 26 years, son of Late Dinesh Singh, resident of Village Kachra, P.O. and P.S. Hussainabad, District Palamau .... .... .... Opposite Parties CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners : Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P. ------ 02/11.05.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mohammadganj P.S. Case No. 16 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the false allegation has been made of murder of daughter-in-law. He next submits that husband of the deceased has been granted regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that there is direct allegation against all the accused persons of demanding money and torturing and the allegations are there of strangulation. He also submits that now process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners in reply submits that in the exceptional circumstance even process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued, anticipatory bail can be maintained. He submits that in view of aforesaid facts, the petitioners may kindly be granted anticipatory bail. 2026:JHHC:14237 6. Looking to the contents of the FIR, it transpires that there are allegations against the petitioners of demanding money and assaulting and the allegations are made that by way of strangulation, the deceased has been murdered and she died due to Asphyxia on account of hanging. The petitioners are mother-in-law and brother-in- law. There is no doubt that in exceptional circumstances, even after issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., anticipatory bail can be maintained, however, the allegations made against these petitioners as discussed hereinabove, no exceptional circumstances has been made out to entertain this anticipatory bail application even after issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C, the allegations are there against the petitioners of assault, in the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners, is hereby, rejected. Interim order earlier granted, is hereby, vacated. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Anit Uploaded 13.05.2026