( 2026:JHHC:24047 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 3707 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3707 of 2026 Pappu Sharma @ Pappur Rana (aged about 33 years), son of Bhuneshwar Badhai, resident of Village- Garjasarn, P.O. Khorimahuwa, P.S. Dhanwar, Dist.- Giridih … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate ----- 05/12.08.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No.249/2024 dated 15.10.2024, registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 191(1)(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that one person has died however the allegation of assault is not there against the petitioner. He next submits that only allegation is there against the petitioner of unlawful assembly. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and informant jointly opposed the prayer and submit that the petitioner is named accused and on the land in question, Section 163 BNSS was imposed and in spite of that, the petitioner along with others have gone there and assaulted Abhimanyu Bhokta and ( 2026:JHHC:24047 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 3707 of 2026 subsequently he died. On these grounds, they submit that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the petitioner is named accused and all have assembled in spite of imposition of Section 163 BNSS and charge-sheet has been submitted against other accused persons, however, the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected. 6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 12th August, 2026 Ajay/