( 2026:JHHC:20896 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 2979 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2979 of 2026 Kamal Pandey @ Kamal Kishor Pandey, aged about 24 years, son of Kailash Kumar Pandey, resident of Krishnapuri Colony, P.O. & P.S. Pakur, Dist.- Pakur … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vijoy Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate ----- 04/15.07.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pakur Town P.S. Case No.36 of 2026 dated 05.03.2026, registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 352, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pakur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only on suspicion. He next submits that one Khudu Mandal has taken name of the petitioner to whom the petitioner is in inimical terms. He also submits that only on the basis of CCTV footage, the petitioner has been implicated on suspicion. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and informant jointly opposed the prayer and submit that in para 36 of the case diary, it has come that the petitioner was present on the spot and that has been captured in the CCTV. Learned counsel appearing for the State further submits that Khudu Mandal ( 2026:JHHC:20896 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 2979 of 2026 has stated that this petitioner has reached there on scooty. On these grounds, they submit that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Although the petitioner is not named in the FIR, however, in course of investigation, the petitioner’s name has surfaced and one Khudu Mandal has taken name of the petitioner and he has stated that the petitioner arrived on the spot by scooty. In para 36 of the case diary, it has come that in the CCTV footage, the presence of the petitioner has been captured. Further, it has come in the case diary that the accused persons including the petitioner have assembled on the spot with intention to kill the husband of the informant. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, as such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected. 6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 15th July, 2026 Ajay/