( 2026:JHHC:13477 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 2102 of 2026 1. Monu Yadav, aged about 23 years, son of Pistol Gop, resident of post ad Maheshpur, Rampur, P.O. Godda, P.S Godda, District-Godda, Jharkhand- 814133 2. Sourabh Kumar @ Saurav Yadav, aged about 21 years, son of Manoj Yadav, resident of Gram Varan Hilaway, Post-Hilaway, Hilawa-, P.O. Hilaway, District-Godda, Jharkahnd-814133 3. Sushil Yadav, aged about 31 years, son of Suresh Yadav, resident of village -Baran, Hilaway, P.O. Hilaway, P.S. Hilaway, District-Godda, Jharkhand-814133 4. Mritunjay Mandal, aged about 26 years, son of Pramod Mandal, resident of Gram Rampur, P.O. Basantrai, P.S. Basantrai, District-Godda, Jharkhand- 814155 ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P. 02/ 06.05.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Basantrai P.S. Case No. 09 of 2026, registered under sections 281, 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 132 and 352 of BNS, 2023, Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, Section 4/54 of Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concessions Rules, 2004 and Section 9/13 of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation & Storage), Rules, 2017, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the anticipatory bail of the petitioners has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge only on the ground that petitioners are having criminal antecedent. She next submits that correct details have been provided by the petitioners and view of that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. ( 2026:JHHC:13477 ) 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that petitioners are having criminal antecedent. He submits that allegations are there that the petitioners along with others came at the spot and got the vehicle released forcibly from the custody of police and in view of that anticipatory bail of the petitioners may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that petitioners are having criminal antecedent and allegations are there that the petitioners along with others came at the spot and got the vehicle released forcibly from the custody of police, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Dt.06.05.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-