Jamshed Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1994 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Jamshed Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 16 March, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                                         ( 2026:JHHC:6915 )




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             A.B.A. No. 1009 of 2026
            Jamshed Ansari, aged about 28 years, son of Ahmad Ansari, resident of
            Padarmaniya Birni, P.O. Dwarpahari, P.S. Birni, District- Giridih, Jharkhand
                                                              ... Petitioner
                                       -Versus-
            The State of Jharkhand                            ... Opposite Party
                                             -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

For the Petitioner : Mrs. Sarweshwari Kumari, Advocate Mr. Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.

-----

02/16.03.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel

appearing for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Birni P.S.

Case No.154/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2),

89, 85, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of the

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is happened to be the husband of the informant. She further

submits that the matter is arising out of the matrimonial dispute. She then

submits that there are general and omnibus allegations of assault and

demand of dowry. She next submits that the allegation of miscarriage of

pregnancy is of the year 2023, whereas, the FIR has been lodged in the year

2025. She also submits that the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the

informant have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge.

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

submits that the petitioner is happened to be the husband of the informant

and in view of that, the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.

( 2026:JHHC:6915 )

5. Considering that the petitioner is the husband of the informant and

there are general and omnibus allegations and the alleged allegation of

miscarriage of pregnancy is of the year 2023, whereas, the FIR has been

lodged in the year 2025 and in that view of the matter, the petitioner is

directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today

and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and

conditions as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

6. Accordingly, this application is disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 16th March, 2026 Ajay/