2026:JHHC:12763 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 1968 of 2026 ---- Vikas Jee @ Vikash Jii @ Dinesh Jee @ Dinesh @ Vishundeo Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav @ Umesh Jee aged about 51 years son of Tapeshwar Yadav, resident of Bhitdiha PO Manatu, PS Manatu, Dist. Palamau, Jharkhand .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Surendra Pd. Sinha, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Satish Prasad, Advocate ---- 2/30.04.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with S.T.Case No.58 of 2013, arising out of Manika PS Case No.47 of 2011, corresponding to GR Case No.309 of 2011, for offence registered under section 147, 148, 149, 353, 307 of IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act and Section 17 of CLA Act and Section 10, 13, 19 UAPA Act, pending in court of learned Additional Sessions Judge II, Latehar. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case and the petitioner has already surrendered before the Superintendent of Police, Latehar, and thereafter, the petitioner was living a normal life. He next submits that the allegations of taking extortion money is not correct and according to him, the petitioner has faced the trial in other cases in which the petitioner has been acquitted and, on these grounds, he submits that the anticipatory bail may kindly be 2026:JHHC:12763 2 granted. He also submits that charge-sheet has not been submitted under the UAPA Act. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that the petitioner has surrendered before the Superintendent of Police, Latehar pursuant to the Government policy, however, the allegations are there against the petitioner of indulging in firing upon the CRPF Battalion personnel in the forest of Latehar and in view of that, anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. The case is registered against the petitioner under sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 307 of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act as well as Section 17 of CLA Act. It transpires that from the order of the learned Sessions Judge that the petitioner has surrendered as per the Surrender Policy of the Government on 25.07.2016 and thereafter the petitioner is absconding since year 2023 and the allegations are there of indulging in firing upon the CRPF Batallion personnel in forest of Latehar, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected and consequently this anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 30.04.2026 SI/