( 2026:JHHC:29333 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.5458 of 2026 ------ 1. Shyamal Goswami, S/o Late Uma Charan Goswami, aged about 37 years, 2. Nirmal Goswami, S/o Late Umar Charan Goswami, aged about 52 years, Both resident of Village-Gopinathpur, P.S. + P.O.-Jaridih, Dist.- Bokaro-Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Dwivedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 29-09-2026 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No.115 of 2026 instituted under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 324(4) and 3(5)S of the B.N.S., 2023, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with co-accused persons, attempted to murder Sanjeev Kumar causing severe injury on his head. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner no.2 are general and omnibus in nature of only disturbing the possession of the informant party on the place of occurrence land, but there is no allegation of assault against the petitioner no.2. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner no.1 of causing severe head injury and the final opinion of the doctor is yet to come due to want of C.T. Scan Report, hence, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner no.1 is required during the investigation of the case in order to find out the details of the case. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner no.1 ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner no.1 namely Shyamal Goswami of assaulting on the head of the victim causing grievous injury on his head as well as the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case, this Court is not inclined to give the privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1 namely Shyamal Goswami. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner no.1 is rejected. So far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, keeping in view, the allegation against him being general and omnibus in nature and there is no allegation against the petitioner no.2 of assaulting anyone, hence, this Court is inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.2. Accordingly, the petitioner no.2 is directed to surrender in the Court below within two weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No.115 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner no.2 will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and he will not disturb or annoy the informant or his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 29/09/2026 Abhiraj/