2026:JHHC:19050 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 3485 of 2026 ---- 1.Surendra Kumar Murmu @ Surendra Murmu, aged about 27 years, son of Balu Ram Murmu, resident of Village Kadrukahutta PO Penk, PS Nawadih, District Bokaro, Jharkhand 2.Parmeshwar Murmu @ Prem Murmu aged about 23 years, son of Kartik Murmu, resident of Village Kadrukahutta PO Penk, PS Nawadih, District Bokaro, Jharkhand 3.Anil Kumar Murmu @ Bablu Murmu @ Gogli Murmu, aged about 21 years, son of Lodha Murmu, resident of Village Kadrukahutta, PO Penk, PS Nawadih, District Bokaro, Jhrakhand .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Rahul Dev, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, Advocate ---- 2/30.06.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioners and for State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Penk Narayanpur PS Case No.30 of 2025, for offence registered under section 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 103(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioners were not on the spot and in spite of that, the petitioners have been implicated in this case. He next submits that the allegation of assault is there on other accused persons who are named in the FIR 2026:JHHC:19050 2 and pursuant to that, the deceased has died and on these grounds, he submits that the anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that on the basis of the video clip and the photographs, the accused persons have been arrested and they have admitted their involvement including the petitioners and on these grounds he submits that involvement of the petitioners are also there and in view of that, anticipatory bail to the petitioners may kindly be rejected. 5. The persons who have been caught by the police pursuant to examining the video clips and the photographs, they have admitted their involvement including the involvement of these petitioners and due to the assault, the deceased has died, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the present case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, and as such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is, hereby, rejected and consequently, this anticipatory bail application being A.B.A.No.3485 of 2026 is, hereby, dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 30.06.2026 SI/