2026:JHHC:2774 --1-- A.B.A. No. 568 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 568 of 2026 ---- 1. Satyendra Mahto, aged about 71 years, son of Late Indradev Mahto, resident of Ward No.4, village – Tandwa, PO – Tandwa, PS – Ramna, District – Garhwa 2. Shambhu Mehta, aged about 66 years, son of Late Keshwar Mehta, resident of Ward No.6, village – Tandwa, PO – Tandwa, PS – Ramna, District - Garhwa .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate :- Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, Advocate ---- 04/03.02.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No.82 of 2025 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 140(2), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Garhwa. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that there are 15 named accused persons and the allegations are there against 15 to 20 persons of kidnapping of the informant and demanding of ransom. He further submits that there are general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons and in view 2026:JHHC:2774 --2-- A.B.A. No. 568 of 2026 of that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioners were the accomplice in kidnapping of the informant and informant has dialed to the police somehow and police has reached to the spot and apprehended six of the accused persons and in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. The petitioners are the accomplice in the said crime and the allegations are there of kidnapping of the informant and demanding of ransom and from the spot six accused persons have been arrested and the petitioners are the accomplice of those persons. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court, the same will be decided in accordance with law without prejudice to this order. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 03.02.2026 Sangam/