[2026:JHHC:21662] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4023 of 2026 1. Birendra Kumar Saw @ Birendra Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Late Krishna Saw, resident of Bapu Nagar, Karmik Nagar, P.O. ISM, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad. 2. Jitendra Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Late Krishna Saw, resident of Bapu Nagar, Karmik Nagar, P.O. ISM, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad. ..... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Pradyot Chatterjee, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 22.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 318(4), 338 and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case alleging that the petitioners have taken certain amount on the false pretext of providing job in the Indian Railway. He next submits that so far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned on the request of co-accused Manish Kumar, he has only provided the Bank Account of his daughter for transferring the amount and it has been alleged that an amount of Rs. 3.5 lakhs has been transferred in that account. He further submits that the said Manish Kumar account was frozen and due to that he has [2026:JHHC:21662] -2- requested the petitioner No. 2. He next submits that the said amount was fraudulently withdrawn by said Manish Kumar. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioners. 4. Learned A.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the amount has been fraudulently received by said Manish Kumar and the petitioners are also the accomplice of the other co-accused and further allegations are there of taking money on the pretest of providing job in the Railway. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the allegations are there against all the accused persons of taking money on the pretext of providing job in the Indian Railway and certain amount has been transferred in the account of the daughter of petitioner No. 2, which prima facie suggests that involvement of petitioner No. 2 is also there and what has been argued with regard to Manish Kumar is not tenable and petitioners are connived with each other and allegations are there of taking money with assurance to provide job in the Indian Railway and 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:-22.07.2026 Amitesh/-