( 2026:JHHC:29158 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5385 of 2026 ------ 1. Binod Kumar Mahto @ Binod Mahto @ Binod Kumar Mahato, aged about 46 years, S/o Jageshwar Mahto 2. Vikash Kumar Pandey @ Vikash Pandey, aged about 37 years, S/o Mohan Lal Pandey, 3. Mukesh Kumar Mahto @ Mukesh Mahto @ Mukesh Kumar Mahato, aged about 35 years, S/o Chandi Charan Mahato, 4. Kishore Kumar Mahto @ Kishore Kumar Mahato @ Kishore Kumar, aged about 39 years, S/o Mahanand Mahato, 5. Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Mahto, aged about 48 years, S/o Yadav Chandra Mahato, 6. Tapas Kumar, aged about 35 years, S/o Milan Mahato, All Residents of Village –Pindrajora, P.O. –Pindrajora, P.S. –Pindrajora, District –Bokaro (Jharkhand). … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 28.09.2026 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No.235 of 2024 registered under sections 126(2), 352, 115(2), 117(2), 132, 121 (1), 331 (4), 3(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners went to the 33/11 KV Electric Power Sub-Station, Pindrajora and threatened the personnel deputed there by abusing and assaulting them and also threatened that unless there is seamless flow of the electricity, the villagers will break the electricity pole and Electric Energy Sub- Station which has been constructed over the land of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is then submitted that though the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. but in para-7 of the case diary, the petitioners have been identified by the victim –Basant Kumar Mahato on the basis of their photographs. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-10 of the instant anticipatory bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above-named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Bokaro, in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No.235 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 28.09.2026 Sonu/