( 2026:JHHC:12714 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 7179 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7179 of 2025 1. Narayan Mahtha @ Narayan Pasi, aged about 61 years, son of Late Babua Mahatha, resident of House No.11, Amagaria, P.O. & P.S. Rikhiya, District- Deoghar 2. Binod Mahtha, aged about 36 years, son of Narayan Mahatha, resident of House No.11, Amagaria, P.O. & P.S. Rikhiya, District- Deoghar … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate ----- 03/30.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Rikhiya P.S. Case No.53 of 2025, registered for the offence under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-B) (a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the informant at the outset submits that so far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, he has already been apprehended. 4. In view of that, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this anticipatory bail application. 5. In view of that, so far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, his prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected as withdrawn. 6. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that there was no overt act at the place of occurrence on the part of ( 2026:JHHC:12714 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 7179 of 2025 petitioner no.2 and even the allegations relating to offence are not cognizable. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the State and informant jointly opposed the prayer and submit that petitioner no.2 has played an active role in the murder of the husband of the informant and this person has overtaken the deceased and stopped his vehicle and thereafter firing was made by one Jelu @ Jitendra Mahtha and pursuant to that the husband of the informant died on the spot. 8. In view of the above and considering that petitioner no.2 has played an active role and he has stopped the vehicle of the deceased and thereafter firing was made and pursuant to that the husband of the informant died on the spot. 9. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner no.2 and, his prayer for anticipatory bail is also rejected. 10. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 30th April, 2026 Ajay/