( 2026:JHHC:18979 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 2096 of 2026 With A.B.A. No. 2510 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2096 of 2026 1. Nasiruddin Ansari, aged about 32 years 2. Karim Ansari, aged about 30 years 3. Md. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Ansari, aged about 28 years 4. Mobin Ansari @ Mian, aged about 25 years 5. Raubul Ansari @ Rabul Ansari, aged about 19 years All S/o Amir Miyan, resident of Village- Borwa, P.O. & P.S. Narayanpur, District- Jamtara … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party With A.B.A. No. 2510 of 2026 1. Siraj Ansari, aged about 31 years 2. Salim Ansari, aged about 36 years Both Sons of Md. Iliyas Borwa, resident of Sabanpur, P.O. & P.S. Sabanpur, District- Jamtara … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate (In A.B.A.-2096/26) Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate (In A.B.A.-2510/26) For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. (In A.B.A.-2096/26) Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P. (Through VC) (In A.B.A.2510/26) ----- 06/30.06.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State in respective cases. 2. Both the A.B.As. are arising out of the same FIR and in view of that, both the A.B.As. are being heard together with consent of the parties. 3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Narayanpur P.S. Case No.80 of 2024 dated 27.07.2024, registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109, 190, 191(2)(3), 351(2) of the BNS, pending in the Court of the learned C.J.M., Jamtara. ( 2026:JHHC:18979 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 2096 of 2026 With A.B.A. No. 2510 of 2026 4. Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in A.B.A. No.2096 of 2026 submits that there are case and counter case between the parties. He further submits that the altercation took place due to land dispute. He then submits that one Ibrahim Mian has assaulted upon Mangal Mian and pursuant to that, he has died. He next submits that so far as these petitioners are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations against them. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 5. Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in A.B.A. No.2510 of 2026 submits that there are general and omnibus allegations against these two petitioners. He also submits that due to land dispute, the altercation took place. He next submits that the allegation of assault is there against Ibrahim Mian and Ibrahim Mian has faced the trial and he has been convicted. He further submits that the investigation against these petitioners is still pending. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 6. Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the State in A.B.A. No.2096 of 2026 and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned counsel for the State appearing through Video Conferencing in A.B.A. No.2510 of 2026 opposed the prayer and submit that all these petitioners have instigated and, thereafter, the assault has been made. They further submit that even the petitioners are not cooperating in the investigation and in view of that, they submit that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners may kindly be rejected. ( 2026:JHHC:18979 ) -3- A.B.A. No. 2096 of 2026 With A.B.A. No. 2510 of 2026 7. On perusal of the FIR, it transpires that there are allegations against all the accused persons of coming on the land and they have sketched a line and stated that if anybody has guts to cross this line, they will see to it and, thereafter, the altercation took place and assault has been made and pursuant to that, the deceased has died. It is not clear who is the aggressor in such incident. Further, the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution in paras 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the case diary. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in both the A.B.As. and, as such, their prayer for anticipatory bail, hereby, rejected. 8. Accordingly, both the applications are dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 30th June, 2026 Ajay/