Md. Arman Shah vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 939 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Md. Arman Shah vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party on 10 February, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                                          2026:JHHC:3473




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          ABA No.725 of 2026

             1. Md. Arman Shah, aged about 36 years, S/o -Md. Rafique, R/o-E/512,
             Road No. 1B, Near P.T.P.S. Hospital, Patratu Tharmal Power Station,
             P.O. + P.S. Patratu, District-Ramgarh, Jharkhand-829119.
             2. Abhishek Kumar @ Manish Choubey, aged about 27 years, S/o-
             Prabhat Choubey, R/o New Market, PTPS, P.O. + P.S. Patratu, District-
             Ramgarh, Jharkhand-829119.                   .... Petitioners
                                         Versus
             The State of Jharkhand                       ...      Opp. Party
                                      --------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

------

             For the Petitioners      :       Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate
             For the State            :       Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, A.P.P.
                                      ------
2/10.02.2026      Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioners and

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with

Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No. 264/2025, registered under

sections 126(2)/115(2)/308(3)/140/3(5) of B.N.S., pending in the

Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class at Ramgarh.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that so far

as these petitioners are concerned, there are general and omnibus

allegation against the petitioners and they have been falsely

implicated in the case. He next submits that the main allegation is

there against Md. Jamir and in his anticipatory bail application, this

court has been pleased to call the case diary. He next submits that the

learned court has rejected the anticipatory bail of these petitioners

only on the ground that the said Md. Jamir is having eight criminal

antecedents. He next submits that so far as these petitioners are

concerned, they are having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in

para 14 of the petition.

2026:JHHC:3473

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and

submits that the petitioners are said to be accomplice of Md. Jamir.

5. Looking into the contents of the FIR, it transpires that the

allegation of abducting and threatening and even demanding money

are there against Md. Jamir. The petitioners are having no criminal

antecedent and the learned court, only on the criminal antecedents of

Md. Jamir, rejected the anticipatory bail application of these

petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to these

petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners above named are directed to

surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from the date

of receipt of the order and on the event of their surrender / arrest,

they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-

(Twenty-Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount of

each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class at

Ramgarh, in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.

264/2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)

of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

7. This Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly allowed and

disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 10.02.2026 R.Kumar