[2026:JHHC:19440] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3569 of 2026 1. Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Kumar Yadav, aged about- 43 years, S/O Chintamani Yadav. 2. Chintamani Yadav @ Kolha Yadav aged about- 75 years S/O Khosho Yadav Both are R/o Village -Suiyadih, P.O- Pesham, P.S. Birni, Dist- Giridih. ..... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Mritunjay Chaudhary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate. ------ 03/ 03.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Birni (Bharkatta O.P.) P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 115(2), 118(2), 109(1), 308(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and altercation took place when the informant was constructing a cow shed. He next submits that the petitioner No. 2 has also filed a petition for registration of the FIR, however, FIR has not been registered by the police and in support thereof he refers to Annexure2 of the petition. He further submits that thereafter the petitioner No. 2 filed a complaint case being complaint case No. 982 of 2026 before the learned court. He then submits that the petitioner No. 2 is aged about 75 years and allegations are there against him of assaulting the informant by rod, [2026:JHHC:19440] -2- however, injury is said to be lacerated. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioners. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant have jointly opposed the prayer and submit that the allegations are there of making assault by way of sword and also by rod and due to which, injuries have been received by the informant. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. In the FIR, there is direct allegation against the petitioner No. 1 of making assault upon the informant by way of sword, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner No. 1. As such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. 6. So far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, he is aged about 75 years and he has gone to file a case before the police, however, the FIR has not been registered by the police and thereafter he has filed a complaint case before the learned court and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner No. 2, above named. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner No. 2, named above, is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, in connection with Birni (Bharkatta O.P.) P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-03.07.2026 Amitesh/-