[2026:JHHC:10857] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1657 of 2026 1. Shekh Pappu @ Mohammad Pappu aged about 48 years, S/o- Shekh Majbul @ Shekh Mofil. 2. Shekh Sokim aged about 55 years, S/o- Sheikh Habib Both of Uttar Karam Tola, P.O.& P.S- Mirzachowki, District- Sahibganj (Jharkhand). ..... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Md. Yasir Arafat, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. ------ 04/ 16.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 610 of 2021, registered for the offence under Sections 33, 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Sahibganj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per offence report, the forest guard had received the secret information that on the pucci road going to Karamtola to Mirzachouki near Dihari Parwatola, some miscreants had left a tractor and when they were chased by them they managed to flee away. He next submits that the said tractor was seized along with 24 pieces of Semal wood logs. He further submits that though the name of the petitioners figured in the F.I.R., yet neither the said tractor nor the Semal wood logs belong to them. He also submits that the applicants have no complicity in commission of the alleged offence and they are having no criminal [2026:JHHC:10857] -2- antecedent and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-7 of the petition. He further submits that in the similar circumstance, the other co-accused has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 6185 of 2022 by the co-ordinate bench of this court. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. In view of the above no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit from the State and further in the similar circumstance, the other co- accused has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 6185 of 2022 by the co-ordinate bench of this court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioners are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail, at this stage. 6. In the event of arrest, the abovenamed petitioners, involved in the aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. [2026:JHHC:10857] -3- (iii) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners. (iv) The petitioners shall co-operate in the trial before the court below and in case of non-cooperation, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners without any reference to this Court. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-16.04.2026 Amitesh/-