( 2026:JHHC:17203 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3078 of 2026 1. Prince Yadav @ Prince Kumar, aged about 18 years, son of Manoj Yadav, resident of House No. 167, Zone No. 1B, Birsanagar, P.O. and P.S. Birsanagar, Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum 2. Rahul Kumar, aged about 20 years, son of Ajay Kumar Sharma, resident of House No. 318, Zone No. 1B, Birsanagar, P.O. and P.S. Birsanagar, Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum 3. Akash Kumar Yadav @ Akash Kumar, aged about 19 years, son of Ram Lakhan Yadav, resident of House No. 11, Road No. 2, Zone No. 1B, Birsanagar, P.O. and P.S. BIrsanagar, Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh Advocate Mr. Shashank Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P. 04/ 15.06.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 24 of 2026, registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 140(1), 62 and 3(5) of BNS, 2026, pending in the Court of learned J.M Ist Class, Jamshedpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false allegation is made against the petitioners of assault and trying to kidnapping the informant. He submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that there are direct and specific allegation of assault and trying to kidnap the informant. 5. Looking into contents of F.I.R, it transpires that informant along with her sister was taking photograph near pond area and in the meantime the petitioners along with others came there and assaulted the informant and ( 2026:JHHC:17203 ) tried to kidnap the informant by forcing her to board on the motorcycle several times. Further it has come in the order of the learned Sessions Judge that in para 55 of the case diary that the accused persons contacted the injured Satyam Prasad Bhagat and forced him to withdraw the case and threatened to assault him again. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer for their anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Dt.15.06.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-