2026:JHHC:21061 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3869 of 2026 ------ Rajesh Chouhan @ Rajesh Prasad, aged about 41 years, son of Surendra Prasad, resident of Water Board Colony, Godhar Basti, Kusunda, P.O. and P.S. Kusunda, District Dhanbad .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner : Ms. Arpita Sinha, Advocate Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. ------ 02/17.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No. 53 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 190, 308(4), 308(5), 140(1), 62 and 61(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the petitioner and the informant are on business term. She further submits that false allegations are made of demanding extortion. She also submits that one of the co- accused has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge in A.B.P. No.691 of 2026. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer and submits that the case of the present petitioner is distinguishable with the person, who has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. She further submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of sending 15–20 unknown persons to the shop of the informant and asking to pay the extortion amount of Rupees One Lakh per decimal. She also submits that the petitioner is having five criminal 2026:JHHC:21061 antecedents. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. From perusal of the FIR, it transpires that there is direct allegation against this petitioner of sending 15–20 persons for demanding extortion money and it has also been alleged that a sum of Rs.3,30,000/- has been paid by the staff of the informant to the persons, who have gone there and demanded extortion and the petitioner is having five criminal antecedents and so far anticipatory bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge to the co-accused-Rajesh Kumar is concerned, allegation against him is not identical to the present petitioner and he has co-operated in the investigation, in the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, is hereby, rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 17.07.2026 Anit Uploaded 18.07.2026