Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:29702 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2231 of 2026 Md. Islam Sk. @ Aslam Sk. @ Islam Sk. ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Lal Mohamad @ Lalu @ Taukid Alam .... Opposite Parties --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the State : APP --- Order No. 04 Dated 05th October, 2026 Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case 314 of 2011, pending in the Court of learned ACJM, Rajmahal. The prayer for anticipatory bail was earlier rejected in ABA No. 4129 of 2018 vide order dated 03.01.2019 against which the petitioner had moved the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Cr.) No. 3174 of 2019 which however was dismissed on 09.04.2019. The petitioner had again moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in ABA No. 1116 of 2020 and the same was rejected vide order dated 07.08.2020. Renewing the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submission has been advanced that some of the accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail. It has further been submitted that arising out of the same set of occurrence, three criminal cases were instituted and out of which in Ranga P.S. Case No. 29 of 2010, final form was submitted, showing the case to be of no proof. Learned senior counsel has also submitted that a Protest- cum-Complaint Case No. 206 of 2011 was also lodged by the mother of the opposite party No. 2 in which the petitioner was not made an accused. It has been submitted that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected on 03.01.2019 primarily on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, but the antecedents of the petitioner are after the institution of the case and therefore such fact has not been appropriately considered in the earlier round of litigation. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. It appears that in ABA No. 4129 of 2018 vide order dated 03.01.2019, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that he had criminal antecedents. However, the petitioner had moved this Court once again for grant of anticipatory bail in ABA No. 1116 of 2020 in which the issue of compromise was raised which however was rejected on account of the fact that the case was u/s 302 of the IPC. The plea of the criminal cases against the petitioner having been instituted after the institution of the present case was never taken in ABA No. 1116 of 2020 and a different plea was advanced which was rejected by this Court. It also appears that the petitioner had moved before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and his prayer for anticipatory bail was dismissed. So far as the lodging of separate cases arising out of the same set of occurrence is concerned, the same has already been considered in ABA No. 4129 of 2018. On an overall conspectus of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. This application stands rejected once again. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J.) 05.10.2026 MK Page-2