2026:JHHC:25920 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4887 of 2026 ------ 1. Ram Prasad Mandal, aged about 53 years, son of Late Kishun Mandal 2. Surendra Mandal, aged about 38 years, son of Late Kishun Mandal 3. Suraj Kumar Mandal, aged about 27 years, son of Ram Prasad Mandal 4. Jitendra Mandal @ Jitendra Kumar Mandal, aged about 27 years, son of Kedar Mandal All are resident of Village Kala Road Sariya, P.O. and P.S. Sariya, District Giridih, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Ms. Vipul Divya, Advocate ------ 02/28.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Saria P.S. Case No.106 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 308(2), 118(1), 109(1), 352, 351(2)(3), 324(5) and 333 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case and the petitioners have not assaulted and they were not involved in demanding of the money. He further submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and informant jointly oppose the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of assault and even demanding of the money and further the petitioners are having criminal antecedents and that has come in the order of the learned Sessions Judge. On these grounds, they submit that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. On perusal of the FIR, it transpires that while the informant was renovating his house, the petitioners reached on the spot on 25.06.2026 at 2026:JHHC:25920 03:30 p.m. armed with lathi, danda, rod, axe and sword and entered in the house and demanded Rupees Five Lakhs. When the informant refused to pay the extortion money, these petitioners assaulted with rod and axe, pursuant to that the mother of the informant received the injury on her head. They were also using filthy language and threatened the informant and his family members of dire consequences. The allegations are further made that the boundary wall of the informant was demolished by these petitioners and destroying the windows and even destroying the CCTV camera installed in the said house and price of the said CCTV camera is assessed to be Rs.35,000/-. There are serious allegation against the petitioners and it has further come in the order of the learned Sessions Judge in para 104 of the case diary that the petitioners are having criminal antecedents, in the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, is hereby, rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 28.08.2026 Anit Uploaded 31.08.2026