(2026:JHHC:20816) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6555 of 2026 1. Furkan Mian @ Furkan Ansari, aged about 49 years, son of Jamal Mian @ Janal Miyan. 2. Md. Jamal Miyan @ Jamal Ansari @ Janal Miyan, aged about 69 years, son of late Ejhar Miyan. (Both are residents of village – Chaktarna Nawadih, PO Choudhary Nawadih, PS – Palojori, District – Deoghar, Jharkhand.). … … …Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl. P.P. : Mr. Sudhir Kr. Roy, Advocate ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 14th July, 2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Palojori P.S. Case No. 20 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under sections 307 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners, are that the petitioners have attempted to murder the son of the informant, namely, Vikram Yadav by exhorting him to touch the high voltage electric wire. It is next submitted that during course of treatment, the deceased had died and the case is being investigated for the petitioners having been abated the suicide of Vikram Yadav. Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the informant, by drawing attention of this Court to the joint compromise petition that has been filed by the informant and the petitioners in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Madhupur, District – Deoghar in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 104 of 2026, the copy of which has been kept at page 15 and 16 of the brief, submits that the matter has been settled between the parties. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 04.06.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate – 1st Class, Madhupur, in connection with Palojori P.S. Case No. 20 of 2024, with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated – 14.07.2026 Aditi