2026:JHHC:17834 --1-- A.B.A. No. 3186 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3186 of 2026 ---- 1. Ranjit Mahato @ Ranjit Kumar Mahato, aged about 30 years, son of Dulal Mahato 2. Samu Mahato @ Samu Kumar Mahato, aged about 42 years, son of Dhananjay Mahato 3. Vinod Saw @ Vinod Mahato @ Binod Saw, aged about 45 years, son of Shukar Mahato All are residents of village – Gorga, PO – Tilaiya, Thiliya, PS – Barwadda, District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Aman Ali, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate ---- 02/19.06.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No.37 of 2026, for the offence registered under Sections 189(2), 189(3), 190, 329, 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352 and 74 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad. 3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.3 has already been apprehended and in 2026:JHHC:17834 --2-- A.B.A. No. 3186 of 2026 that view of the matter, he is not pressing the petition in respect of petitioner No.3, namely, Vinod Saw @ Vinod Mahato @ Binod Saw. He submits that now this petition is surviving only for petitioner Nos.1 and 2. 4. In view of his such submission, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner No.3, namely, Vinod Saw @ Vinod Mahato @ Binod Saw is dismissed as not pressed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the altercation took place due to land dispute between the parties. He further submits that there are case and counter case between the parties and the first case was lodged by the petitioners’ side and thereafter the present case has been lodged. He then submits that the allegation in both the FIRs is same. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that allegations are there of assault. 7. Considering that the altercation took place due to land dispute and there are case and counter case between the parties and the first case was lodged by the petitioners’ side and the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph No.21 of the petition, I am inclined to provide privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.1 and 2, namely, Ranjit Mahato @ Ranjit Kumar Mahato and Samu Mahato @ Samu Kumar 2026:JHHC:17834 --3-- A.B.A. No. 3186 of 2026 Mahato. 8. Accordingly, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of their surrender/arrest, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No.37 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 19.06.2026 Sangam/