( 2026:JHHC:13101 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 230 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 230 of 2026 1. Munna Sharma @ Anil Sharma, age 57 years, son of Baijnath Sharma 2. Sabita Devi @ Sarita Devi, age 59 years, wife of Anil Sharma 3. Chandra Shekhar Sharma, age 21 years, son of Anil Sharma Petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are resident of Village- Sonar Tola, P.O. & P.S. Borio, District- Sahibganj 4. Khusi Sharma, age 16 years, daughter of Anil Sharma, Petitioner nos. 1 to 4 are resident of Village- Kumhar Tola, Purani Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, District- Sahibganj … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, A.P.P. ----- 05/04.05.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Borio P.S. Case No.47/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the BNS, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased respectively. He further submits that petitioner no.3 is the son of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and petitioner no.4 is the niece of the deceased. He then submits that false allegation is made of giving poison to the deceased in the matrimonial house. He next submits that the deceased has consumed poison and that has been informed by the husband himself and now the husband has been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No.2607 of 2026. He also submits that the marriage was solemnized 10 years back. He further submits that in the postmortem report, no other injury has been found and ( 2026:JHHC:13101 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 230 of 2026 only it has been opined that the death has occurred due to poisoning. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioners are in-laws of the deceased. 5. Considering that in the postmortem report, only finding is there that the death has occurred due to poisoning and in the case diary, nothing specific has come against these petitioners, who happened to be in-laws and niece of the deceased respectively and the marriage of the deceased was solemnized 10 years back and the husband has been granted regular bail in the aforesaid B.A. and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj in connection with Borio P.S. Case No.47/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 4th May, 2026 Ajay/