[2026:JHHC:3116] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6807 of 2025 Raju Majhi S/o Bowa Majhi, Aged about 47 years, R/O Village Pokhari, Dimna near Shiv Mandir, Deoghar, P.O. Bhilai Pahari, P.S. MGM, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand - 831012. ..... … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubhashish Rasik Soren, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, A.C. to S.C.-VII. ------ 03/ 05.02.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jadugora P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Ghatshila. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined as Sub-Postmaster, Narwa Mines Sub-Post Office on 06.11.2021 and by way of referring Annexure-2 of the petition he submits that the allegation of misappropriation is there against one Kapil Dev Bhakat, who happened to be an agent of the said Sub-Post Office and the defalcation was made prior to joining of the petitioner to the said Post Office. On these grounds he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that in the case diary, the independent witnesses have been examined under Section 180 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha [2026:JHHC:3116] -2- Sanhita, 2023, wherein they have supported the prosecution case and they have also stated that this petitioner was the accomplish of said Kapil Dev Bhakat. On this ground, he submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. In the case diary, the independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case and the petitioner has close association with said Kapil Dev Bhakat, who happened to be the agent and from the deposited amount of different persons, Rs. 20,13,765/- has been withdrawn in connivance with each other. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, named above. As such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-05.02.2026 Amitesh/-