( 2026:JHHC:24227 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3718 of 2026 Sonali Singh @ Sonali Kumari, aged about 26 years, wife of Manish Kumar, resident of GMoffice Tongi, P.O. Hesalong P.S. Giddi A District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand ...... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. H.K. Shikarwar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, A.P.P. 02/ 13.08.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No. 78 of 2026, registered under sections 111(2) (b), 111(4), 61 of BNS, 2023, section 25 (6), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ramgarh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is own sister of co-accused of the present case namely, Sunny Singh and Badal Singh @ Kunal Kumar. He further submits that the petitioner used to look after their cases and did pairvi of her brother and for that reason only the police have implicated the petitioner in the present case. He next submits that after the death of the petitioner’s father she used to live in the house of her maternal uncle, the co-accused namely, Kunal Singh @ Shivam Singh is the maternal brother of the petitioner and in order to implicate the petitioner in the present case a totally false case has been lodged to harass and humiliate the petitioner and her entire family. He then submits that a detailed bank statement of the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure-2 wherefrom it is crystal clear that no ransom amount has been received in the account of the petitioner pursuant to demand made by the said gang. He next submits that the marriage of the petitioner has been solemnized with ( 2026:JHHC:24227 ) the respectable CCL employee. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner is named in F.I.R and allegations are there against her of collecting and managing the money of levy of the co-accused Sunny Singh and the said Sunny Singh is working for Rahul Dubey Gang as disclosed by the apprehended co-accused before the Patratu Police. He next submits that in course of investigation restatement of the informant and statement of the witnesses have been recorded and they have supported the case of prosecution and complicity of the petitioner in the present case which is apparent from pars 2, 4, 5, 6 ,7 and 8 of the case diary. He next submits that in para 19 of the case diary in course of investigation statement of co- accused person persons has been recorded who have admitted their guilt and complicity of the present petitioner. He also submits that in course of investigation, supervision note and enquiry report was obtained and on perusal of the same it is clear from the evidences collected the allegations were proved against the petitioner which is evident from paras 34 and 38 of the case diary. He submits that in page 90 of the case diary the specific role of the petitioner has been disclosed. On these grounds, he submits that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner may kindly be rejected. 5. The petitioner is named in F.I.R. She is said to be own sister of co-accused Sunny Singh and maternal sister of Badal Singh @ Kunal Kumar. The allegations against the petitioner is that she used to collect and manage the levy money which was demanded by Rahul Dubey gang. The witnesses in the aforesaid paras have supported the case and complicity of the petitioner which has come in page 10 of the case diary that is repeated in ( 2026:JHHC:24227 ) page 12 and page 14 of the case diary. The specific role of the petitioner has been disclosed in page 90 of the case diary. Serious allegations are there against the petitioner of managing the affairs of her brothers namely, Sunny Singh and Badal Singh @ Kunal Kumar who were the members of Rahul Deby gang. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, her prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Dt.13.08.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-