2026:JHHC:16016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 2871 of 2026 --- Rajendra Ravidas … … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party(s) --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Thakur, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Prateek Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party(s) : A.P.P. --- 2/02.06.2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. assisted by Mr. Prateek Singh, learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. Case No. 51 of 2026. It has been alleged that Bhuneshwar Ram and his associates had entered into the house of the informant and apart from causing damage to the house had committed assault upon the informant, her parents, caretaker as well as one Kunti Devi as a result of which, they had suffered injuries. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and he has been implicated only on account of the statement of one witness namely Ram Tahal Mahto showing his presence at the place of occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that no specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Mr. Prateek Singh, learned counsel appearing for the informant has submitted that the petitioner has been named by one of the witnesses. Regard being had to the manner of occurrence which reveals that two persons had forcibly entered into the house of an army man and committed brutal assault upon the females as well and the fact that the presence of the petitioner has been noted in the evidence of one Ram 2026:JHHC:16016 Tahal Mahto, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. This application stands rejected. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) 02.06.2026. Suman/Nandini/-