2026:JHHC:27509 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.4653 of 2026 ---- 1. Ganesh Bhuiya, son of Suddeshwar Bhiyan, aged about 48 years. 2. Om Kumar, Son of Ganesh Bhuiyan, aged about 23 years. Both resident of Dhori 5, P.O.-Dhori, P.S. – Bermo, District – Bokaro, Jharkhand - 825102 …. …. Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ---- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. ---- 05/Dated: 11th September, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bermo P.S. Case No.63 of 2026 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have not done any overt act upon the deceased. Even they have not strike with a fist to the deceased and the wrong allegation has been made that the petitioners are the associates of main assailants namely Santosh Saw. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the witnesses have supported the case and in the case diary they have taken the name of the petitioners. They are said to be the associates of the main assailants namely Santosh Saw and the allegations of assault are there against the petitioners and as such prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that it is a case arising under Section 103(1) of the BNS. The petitioners are said to be the associates of the main assailants and the allegations of assault by fist are also there against the accomplice of Santosh Saw. From the pages Nos.77 to 92 all the witnesses have supported the case of 2026:JHHC:27509 Page | 2 A.B.A. No.4653 of 2026 the prosecution and they have taken the name of the petitioners. Pages 77 to 92 and 94 of the case diary petitioners are named in the FIR. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 11th September, 2026 Amar/- Uploaded on 16.09.2026