( 2026:JHHC:26037 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 4910 of 2026 1. Nanhu Mahto aged about 41 years, S/O Kavan Mahto, R/O Village-Jhati, P.O. & P.S.- Manatu, District- Palamu 2. Giran Ganjhu @ Giran Singh aged about 49 years, S/O Deva Singh, R/O Village- Jhati, P.O. & P.S.- Manatu, District- Palamu 3. Anil Ganjhu, aged about 35years, S/O Late Jagdish Ganjhu, R/O Village-Balhi, P.O. & P.S.-Kunda, District-Chatra. 4. Rajendra Ganjhu, aged about 40 years, S/O Mundrika Ganjhu @ Munarik Ganjhu, R/O Village-Balhi, P.O. & P.S.- Kunda, District-Chatra. 5. Raju Ganjhu aged about 40 years, S/O Lakhan Ganjhu, R/O Village-Balhi, P.O. & P.S.-Kunda, District-Chatra. 6. Somar Ganjhu, aged about 59 years, S/O Garaj Ganjhu @ Chaita Ganjhu, R/O Village- Hindiya Khurd, P.O. & P.S.-Kunda, District-Chatra. ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Rishi Pallava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl. P.P 02/ 29.08.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1443 of 2024 arising out of Offence Report No. 4521 dated 15.12.2024, registered under sections 33(1) (c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989-90), pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits that allegations are made that the petitioners have tried to cultivate opium plant in the forest land. He next submits that so far petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, they have criminal antecedents. He next submits that petitioner no. 5 is having one criminal antecedent in which he has been acquitted and so far petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 6 are concerned, they have got no criminal antecedents. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of cultivation of poppy plant in the forest land. 5. Considering that so far petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, ( 2026:JHHC:26037 ) they have got criminal antecedents and in view of that I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 3 and 4. Accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioner nos. 3 and 4 namely, Anil Ganjhu and Rajendra Ganjhu, is hereby rejected. 5. So far prayer of bail on behalf of petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 6 are concerned they have got no criminal antecedents and petitioner no.5 has got one criminal antecedent in which he has been acquitted and in view of that I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6. Accordingly, the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6 are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6 shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M, Chatra, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1443 of 2024 arising out of Offence Report No. 4521 dated 15.12.2024, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dt. 29.08.2026 satyarthi-