( 2026:JHHC:30221 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5648 of 2026 ------ 1. Kaleshwar Mahto, aged about 65 years, son of Kari Mahto, resident of Village-Baridih, P.O.-Baridih, P.S.-Ormanjhi, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand 2. Pramila Devi, aged about 56 years, wife of Kaleshwar Mahto, resident of Village-Baridih, P.O.-Baridih, P.S.- Ormanjhi, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Basanti Devi, aged about 32 years, wife of Jyoti Prakash Mahto, resident of Village-Baridih, P.O.-Baridih, P.S.- Ormanjhi, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Mohua Palit, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 08.10.2026 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.102 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2)/ 191(3)/ 190/ 126(2)/ 115(2)/ 118(1)/109/352/351(2)/351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were member of unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly attempted to murder the members of the informant party. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the allegation of assault with dangerous weapon is only against the co-accused-Prem Prakash Mahto and Jyoti Prakash Mahto and the only allegation against the petitioners are that the petitioners assaulted the wife of the informant with stick. It is then submitted that for the selfsame occurrence, from the side of the petitioners, petitioner no.1 has lodged an FIR basing upon which Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.103 of 2026 has been registered. It is next submitted that there was free fight between the parties and the petitioners had no intention to kill anyone. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 12 of the anticipatory bail application. It is then 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 or any of his family members 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 abovenamed 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 J.M., Ranchi, in connection with Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.102 of 2026 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 numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members 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.) 08.10.2026 Gunjan-