[ 2026:JHHC:20784] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3836 of 2026 Dinesh Yadav @ Dinesh Kumar, S/o Budhan Prasad Yadav, aged about 26 years, Resident of Village Jamro, P.O. Jhalar, P.S. Mohanpur, Dist- Deoghar. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. L.C. Roy, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, A.P.P. ------ 05/ 14.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Deoghar Town P.S. Case No. 82 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 75, 76, 78 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to under section 341, 323, 354, 354(A), 354(B) and 354(D) of I.P.C.), pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner happened to be the staff of C.T. Care Hospital, where the grand-mother of the informant was being treated. He next submits that false allegations are made of outraging the modesty of the girl, who is the victim in the case. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that in the CCTV footage, this petitioner was found to be harassing the victim girl and the same has come in the order of the learned Sessions Judge. On these grounds, he submits that [ 2026:JHHC:20784] -2- anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the allegations are there of harassing the victim and forcibly taking her in a washroom and in para-18 of the case diary, it has come that in CCTV footage, the victim was found to be being harassed by this petitioner and the age of the victim is said to be only 18 years and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-14.07.2026 Amitesh/-