[2026:JHHC:21191] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3895 of 2026 1. Bindu Yadav @ Biddu Yadav, aged about-47 years Son of Late Badal Yadav. 2. Kanti Devi, aged about-44 years wife of Bindu Yadav @ Biddu Yadav 3. Bishnu Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav, aged about-28 years Son of Bindu Yadav @ Biddu Yadav. 4. Rita Devi @ Rita Ghosh, aged about-27 years wife of Bishnu Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav. All resident of Village Tursadih, P.O. and P.S. Hirapur, District-Pakur. ..... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Verma, A.P.P. ------ 05/ 18.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 74 of 2025, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Pakur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioners have nothing to do with the murder of the son of the informant. He next submits that there are general and omnibus allegations against them and only on the basis of suspicion, they have been made accused in this case. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. [2026:JHHC:21191] -2- 4. Learned A.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that in several paragraphs of the case diary, the witnesses have supported the prosecution case and that has already been considered by the learned Sessions judge. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. In the FIR, there is allegation that the informant received the information through Lalchand Yadav that his son was murdered in retaliation for a prior animosity and witnesses have also supported the prosecution case in paras-3, 4, 9, 10 and 13 of the case diary. It further transpires that son of the informant was brutally murdered. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-18.07.2026 Amitesh/-