2026:JHHC:27963 --1-- A.B.A. No. 5169 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5169 of 2026 ---- Bharat Mahato, aged about 31 years, son of Madan Mahato, resident of village – Birajpur, PO – Kharkharee, PS – Madhuban, District – Dhanbad, Jharkhand .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mrs. Neeharika Mazumdar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate ---- 02/15.09.2026 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 Chas (M) P.S. Case No.07 of 2023 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 414/34 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 21 of MMDR Act pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bokaro. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is neither the owner nor driver of the truck and the allegations are made of indulging in coal transportation. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents and that has come in the order of learned Sessions Judge considering 2026:JHHC:27963 --2-- A.B.A. No. 5169 of 2026 paragraph No.88 of the case diary. He further submits that in paragraph Nos.49 and 50 of the case diary, the petitioner is said to be owner of the said vehicle. He then submits that coal was being transported in absence of any valid document. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. It has come in the order of learned Sessions Judge that in light of paragraph Nos.49 and 50 of the case diary it is fortified that the petitioner is owner of the said truck wherein the argument has been advanced that the petitioner is not the owner of the said truck. In paragraph No.88 of the case diary as noted in the order of learned Sessions Judge the petitioner is having three criminal antecedents one of the case is also relating to coal and another is related to ST case and even arms act is there in the third case. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, 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 15.09.2026 Sangam/