2026:JHHC:16586-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 601 of 2026 --------- Rabindra Raut, aged about 28 years, Son of Bala Raut, Resident of Bagdigi Colliery, near 12 no. pit, Madhuban, P.O. Lodna, P.S. Jharia, District Dhanbad ... … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ... … Respondent --------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI --------- For the Appellant :Mrs. Sarweshwari Kumari, Advocate For the Res.-State :Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Spl.P.P. --------- 02/09.06.2026 Heard Mrs. Sarweshwari Kumari, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl.P.P. for the State. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Giridih in connection with A.B.P. No. 322 of 2026 arising out of Gandey P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected. It has been alleged that the husband of the informant and others were doing routine work in the stone mine of Manish Jalan, when on account of an explosion the husband of the informant and another labour had sustained injuries which resulted in their death. It has further been alleged that the explosion was caused due to lack of appropriate safety measures in the said mines. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that a co-accused, Prabhas Kumar Kedia, who was also one of the Manager of the mines, has been granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1614 of 2025. It has further been submitted that the appellant cannot be implicated only on account of the fact that there were inadequate safety measures in the mines. 2026:JHHC:16586-DB 2 Learned Spl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant and has submitted that the case of the present appellant is different from that of Prabhas Kumar Kedia, as it was the present appellant who was the Manager of the mines. Though one of the co-accused, Prabhas Kumar Kedia, has been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, a perusal of the said order reveals that he was neither the Manager nor the owner of the mines. In fact, it was specifically submitted by the learned Spl. P.P. that it was the appellant who was the Manager of the mines. Regard being had to the fact that on account of the blast caused in the mines, two persons had succumbed to their injuries and the appellant, being the Manager of the mines, was primarily responsible for the overall safety of the mines, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant and, consequently, this appeal stands disposed of. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Umesh-Abhishek/-