2026:JHHC:24719 --1-- A.B.A. No. 4576 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4576 of 2026 ---- Vikash Singh @ Vikash Kumar Singh, aged about 30 years, son of Pradip Singh, resident of village – Barsotiyabar, PO and PS – 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 :- Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Advocate ---- 02/17.08.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Koderma P.S. Case No.227 of 2025 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 303(2), 317(2)(4) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 26(1)(G), 41 and 42 of Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and Sections 27 and 29 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Court in ABA No.2416 of 2026 which was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 12.05.2026 with liberty to the petitioner to move before the learned Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the earlier order observation is also made to decide the petition filed by the petitioner on merit without prejudiced to rejection order. However, 2026:JHHC:24719 --2-- A.B.A. No. 4576 of 2026 the petitioner has not moved before the learned Court and the second anticipatory bail application has been filed on the same ground. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner has earlier moved before this Court in ABA No.2416 of 2026 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to move before the learned Court by order dated 12.05.2026 and the observation was made that the said application filed by the petitioner will be decided on merit, however, in spite of that the petitioner has not moved before the learned Court and filed second anticipatory bail application on the same ground. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 17.08.2026 Sangam/