( 2026:JHHC:6871 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1304 of 2026 ------ 1. Md. Maksud Ansari @ Maksud Ansari @ Maksud Mian, Aged about 39 years, Son of Md. Ismail Ansari, Resident of Village –Tungun, P.O. –Lavalong, P.S. –Lavalong, District –Chatra (Jharkhand), PIN -825103 2. Md. Husain Ansari @ Husain Ansari, Aged about 33 years, Son of Md. Ajij Ansari, Resident of Village Tungun, P.O. – Lavalong, P.S. –Lavalong, District –Chatra (Jharkhand), PIN -825103. 3. Md. Ainul @ Guddu Mian, Aged about 33 years, Son of Yunush Mian, Resident of Village –Tungun, P.O. – Lavalong, P.S. –Lavalong, District –Chatra (Jharkhand), PIN -825103. 4. Md. Mujlim Mian @ Md. Mujammil, Aged about 44 years, S/o Md. Kashim, Resident of village –Tungun, P.O. – Lavalong, P.S. Lavalong, District –Chatra (Jharkhand), PIN -825103. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Shahid Khan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 13.03.2026 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Lavalong P.S. Case No.47 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 376D/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this is the third journey of the petitioners with the prayer for anticipatory bail and earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected on merits vide order dated 27.02.2025 in A.B.A. No. 4724 of 2024 and thereafter the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 12.09.2025 in A.B.A. No. 5005 of 2025. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the fresh ground is that in the meantime, the petitioners are absconding for some more time. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners of committing gang rape upon the victim lady, there is every chance of the petitioners absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. It is next submitted that though the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners was rejected on 27.02.2025 in A.B.A. No. 4724 of 2024 but the petitioners have not appeared before the court concerned and are absconding. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners as well as the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected for the same reasons as mentioned as mentioned in the order dated 27.02.2025 in A.B.A. No. 4724 of 2024. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 13.03.2026 Sonu/