[ 2026:JHHC:22337] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4160 of 2026 Vijay Gupta @ Vijay Saw aged about 35 years son of Maksudan Saw, resident of village & P.O.- Inderwa, P.S.- Koderma, District- Koderma. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, A.P.P. ------ 05/ 28.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Koderma P.S. Case No. 204 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there are general and omnibus allegations against the petitioner of taking away of the JCB vehicle from the forest area. He next submits that the other co-accused has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2787 of 2026 by the co-ordinate bench of this court. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that in the impugned order, it has come that the petitioner is having 14 criminal cases and the petitioner is the main [ 2026:JHHC:22337] -2- person, who was leading the mob to take away the JCB vehicle from the forest area. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. The petitioner was leading the mob and has taken away the JCB vehicle from the Forest Range officer and further the petitioner is having 14 criminal antecedents and so far as the petitioner, who has been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench is concerned, he is having no criminal antecedent and this petitioner is having 14 criminal antecedents, thus, the said parity is not helping the petitioner. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-28.07.2026 Amitesh/-