( 2026:JHHC:11908 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 6504 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6504 of 2025 1. Abdul Khalid, age 53 years, S/o Late Abdul Manan, R/o Millat Colony, Kanke, P.O. & P.S. Kanke, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand 2. Prem Kumar Paswan, age 35 years, S/o Rajendra Paswan, R/o Near Kali Mandir, Mani Tola, P.O. Hinoo, P.S. Doranda, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Syed Md. Abid, age 45 years, S/o Hafijur Rahaman, R/o Agriculture University, P.O. & P.S. Kanke, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand 4. Pawan Kumar, age 56 years, S/o Prayag Ram, R/o Kumar Bagh Road, Block Chowk, P.O. & P.S. Kanke, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioners -Versus- State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Ms. Kaushiki Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. ----- 05/23.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Daily Market P.S. Case No.51/2022, registered for the offence under Sections 307, 34/120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of the learned C.J.M., Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. She further submits that the name of the petitioners has come on confessional statement. She then submits that the co-accused, who have faced the trial, have already been acquitted by the learned Court and in view of that, anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 23.06.2023, whereas, ( 2026:JHHC:11908 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 6504 of 2025 the present anticipatory bail application has been filed on 07.10.2025. He further submits that the petitioners have not co-operated in the investigation and they are evading the investigation. He next submits that in para 1 of the case diary, it has come that on 21.10.2022 the Officer-in-Charge of Daily Market Police Station has received information on phone that at Vishnu Gali, Ranchi at Mangalam Ply Shop, firing has been done by some unknown miscreants. The victim has been taken to Sewa Sadan Hospital, Ranchi. He submits that the Officer-in-Charge reached the place of occurrence and deputed I.O. there to observe the situation and to see the CCTV footage of nearby shop. He also submits that from the CCTV footage of Pacheesya Boutique, it has come to the knowledge that two miscreants were seen fleeing away from the place of occurrence and one of them was holding pistol in his right hand. 5. In view of the above and considering that the petitioners are said to be accomplice of the co-accused and admittedly firing has been done in the main market of Ranchi city and the petitioners are evading the investigation and acquittal of the co-accused cannot be a ground for anticipatory bail in such a situation where the allegations are there and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and, as such, their prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected. 6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 23rd April, 2026 Ajay/