2026:JHHC:6956 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.1024 of 2026 Mahtab Quraishi, S/o Wahid Quraishi, aged about 23 years, R/o vill- Shahpur P.S. – Chainpur, PO-Daltonganj, District- Palamau, Jharkhand …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Nishant, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P. ------ 2/16.03.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No. 204/2025 registered under Section 115 (2), 126 (2), 127 (2), 140 (1), 303 (2), 103 (1), 351, 3(5), 61 (2) of Bhartiya Nayaya Sanhita 2023 and Section 27 (1) of Arms Act 1959 pending in the Court of learned SDJM at Palamu. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and on the statement of the informant, in the alleged crime. He next submits that statement made by Vinay Agarwal is suspicious. He also submits that Ijhar Khan and Saddam Ansari have confessed and accepted their role in the murder of Hassan Ali. In view of the above submission, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that Vinay Agarwal has stated that petitioner along with Ekram Kuraishi, Ijahar, Deba @ Sonu Sah took the deceased at a place and shot him dead. On these grounds, he submits that 2026:JHHC:6956 2 anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Looking into the contents of the FIR, it transpires that the Vinay Agarwal has stated that Ekram Kuraishi, Saddam Ansari, Ijahar and this petitioner and another Deba @ Sonu Sah, have taken the deceased to the place, where they have shot him dead, petitioner is the accomplice of the other co-accused persons, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 16.03.2026 R.Kumar