( 2026:JHHC:20276 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3681 of 2026 1. Ankit Anand, aged about 34 years, son of Sri Binod Kumar Tiwary, resident of House No.65, Kharangajhar Market, Near Gramin Bank, Birsa Nagar, Chotta Gobindpur, Telco, P.O. Telco, P.S. Telco, District Jamshedpur East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2. Aman Raj @ Aman Tiwari aged about 27 years, son of Sri Binod Kumar Tiwary resident of House No.65, Kharangajhar Market, Near Gramin Bank, Birsa Nagar, Chotta Gobindpur, Telco, P.O. Telco, P.S. Telco, District Jamshedpur East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. Ashok Kumar Rai, aged about 38 years son of late Shyamdev Rai, resident of House No. L4/143, Burma Road, P.O & P.S Burma Mines, District Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, Jharkhand ....... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Siddhartha Ranjan, Advocate Ms. Shipra Shalini, Advocate For the State : Mr. VijoyK Umar Sinha, A.P.P. 02/ 09.07.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 63 of 2026, registered under sections 329, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 74, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, pending in the Court of learned J.M. Ist Class, Jamshedpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners and informant are neighbour and altercation took place due to water drainage. He next submits that there are case and counter case between the parties and both sides have received injury. He further submits that there are general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and entire family members have been made accused. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits ( 2026:JHHC:20276 ) that allegations of assault are there. 5. On perusal of F.I.R, it transpires that there is direct allegation of assault against petitioner no. 1 pursuant to that injury has been received by the son of the informant. Further the petitioner no.1 is having criminal antecedent and in view of that I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1 namely, Ankit Anand. Accordingly, anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1 is rejected. 6. So far anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner nos. 2 and 3. There are case and counter case between the parties and both sides have received injury. 7. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 namely, Aman Raj @ Aman Tiwari and Ashok Kumar Rai. Accordingly, the above named, petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.M. Ist Class, Jamshedpur, in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 63 of 2026, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.09.07.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-