2026:JHHC:835 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 5695 of 2025 ---- Sunil Mandal @ Sunil Kumar Mandal, son of Kuleshwar Mandal, aged about 31 years resident of Village Sonbad, Post Motileda, PS Bengabad, District Giridih, Jharkhand.... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Shiv Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Arup Kr Dey, Advocate ---- 2/13.01.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bengabad P.S. Case No.70 of 2025, for offence registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 76, 304(2), 35(1), 352, 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and for the allegations of prior to 15.5.2025, no complaint case has been lodged and he also submits that one Uttam Mandal who is also the coaccused, has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail to the petitioner may kindly be granted. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that there is allegation against the petitioner of molestation of the informant. He next submits that so far as the molestation part is 2026:JHHC:835 2 concerned, that allegation is not against the said Uttam Mandal and in view of that, no case of parity is made out so far as this petitioner is concerned. He then submits that independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case in paragraph nos.6, 7, 15 and 16 of the case diary. 5. Looking to the contents of the FIR, it transpires that the petitioner was in habit of teasing the informant and on 15.5.2025, he has done the extreme by way of outraging the modesty of the informant and this allegation is not against the said Uttam Mandal and against the said Uttam Mandal the only allegation is made of assault by means of feasts and kicks and in view of that, no case of parity is made out as there is serious allegations against this petitioner of molestation of the informant and independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case in paragraph nos.6, 7, 15 and 16 of the case diary, and in that view of the matter, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected. 6. This anticipatory bail application being A.B.A. No.5695 of 2025 is, hereby, dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 13.01.2026 SI/