2026:JHHC:364 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.14 of 2026 1. Dinesh Kumar @ Dina Kumar Chandrawanshi, age about 51 years, son of Late Pairu Singh, 2. Baby Devi, age about 45 years, wife of Dinesh Kumar @ Dina Kumar Chandrawanshi, 3. Vishal Kumar, age about 24 years, son of Dinesh Kumar @ Dina Kumar Chandrawanshi, 4. Vikash Kumar, age about 20 years, son of Dinesh Kumar @ Dina Kumar Chandrawanshi, 5. Akash Kumar, age about 29 years, son of Dinesh Kumar @ Dina Kumar Chandrawanshi, All are resident of House NO. GH-54, Gayatri Nagar, Sector-II, H.E.C. Colony, Ρ.Ο.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Jagarnathpur, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Thakur, Advocate ------ 2/08.01.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.-406/2025, for the offence under section 326(g) of B.N.S., 2023, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C.-IX, at Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits that six months prior to the occurrence, dispute arose between one of the petitioners and the husband of the informant with regard to price of the eggs as the petitioners No.1 and 3 are earning their livelihood by selling the eggs. He next submits that only on suspicion, the allegations have been made against the entire family members of 2026:JHHC:364 2 putting the shop of the informant on fire. He also submits that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in Para 12 of the petition. He next submits that the petitioners are cooperating in the investigation and this fact has come in Para 35 of the case diary. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of putting the shop of the informant on fire. On query made by the Court to the learned counsel appearing for the State, he accepts that the petitioners are cooperating the investigation as stated in Para-35 of the case diary. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that there are direct allegations against the petitioners of putting the shop of the informant on fire. In view of that, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly not be granted. 6. Considering that only on suspicion, the names of the petitioners have been taken in the FIR. It has been pointed out that for the price of eggs, six months prior to the lodging of the FIR, altercation took place between one of the petitioners and husband of the informant and the entire family members have made accused. It has further been pointed out that petitioner No.1 and 3 are earning their livelihood by selling the eggs and the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in Para 12 of the petition, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7. Accordingly, the petitioners above named are directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from the date 2026:JHHC:364 3 of receipt of the order and on the event of their surrender / arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount of each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.F.C.-IX, at Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No.-406/2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 8. This Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 08.01.2026 R.Kumar