2026:JHHC:25176 --1-- A.B.A. No. 4712 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4712 of 2026 ---- Vikash Choudhary @ Vikash Chaudhary, aged about 38 years, son of Vijay Bhushan Chaudhary, resident of Govindpur Road, Govindpur, PO and PS – Govindpur, District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate ---- 02/20.08.2026 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 Chouparan P.S. Case No.480 of 2023 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 414 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, Rule 9/13 of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017, Rule 54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, Section 30(ii) of Coal Mines Act and Section 33 of Indian Forest Act pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Court in ABA No.526 of 2026 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to move before the learned Court on the strength of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme 2026:JHHC:25176 --2-- A.B.A. No. 4712 of 2026 Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Versus Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51. He further submits that the petitioner has filed the petition, however, has not turned up for argument and in view of that the petition has been rejected. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that there is no fresh ground to entertain the second anticipatory bail application that too when the petitioner after filing of the petition has not turned up before the learned Court. He further submits that even the petitioner is having criminal antecedents. 5. Earlier the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner has been withdrawn with liberty to move before the learned Court and the petitioner has already filed a petition before the learned Court and has not turned up for argument and not appeared before the learned Court. There is no fresh ground to entertain the present anticipatory bail application and even the petitioner is having the criminal antecedents. 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 20.08.2026 Sangam/