2026:JHHC:19921 --1-- A.B.A. No. 3642 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3642 of 2026 ---- Md. Meraz, aged about 26 years, S/o Md. Manjur Shekh, R/o village – Purnanagar, PO and PS – Giridih (M), District – Giridih .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Md. Ayub Ansari, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Advocate ---- 02/07.07.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Giridih (M) P.S. Case No.82 of 2026 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 352, 351(2), 109 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Giridih. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and both the sides are agnates. He further submits that other co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order itself. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that so far this petitioner is concerned there is direct 2026:JHHC:19921 --2-- A.B.A. No. 3642 of 2026 allegation of assault and even outraging the modesty and in view of that learned Sessions Judge has been pleased to reject the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner. On this ground, he submits that anticipatory bail my kindly be rejected. 5. In the FIR there is direct allegation against the petitioner of assault and outraging the modesty and that allegations are not there against the persons, who have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge and by the same impugned order the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. In the FIR there is direct allegation against the petitioner. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 07.07.2026 Sangam/