Basudeo Rana vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... ... ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2296 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Basudeo Rana vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... ... ... on 23 March, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                            ( 2026:JHHC:8080 )




IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               A. B. A. No. 1303 of 2026

       1. Basudeo Rana, aged about 69 years, son of late Birbal Rana
       2. Shankar Rana @ Shankar Vishwakarma, aged about 31 years, son of Shri
          Basudeo Rana @ Basudeo Vishwakarma
       3. Rahul Rana @ Rahul Vishwakarma, aged about 21 years, son of Shri
          Bhagirath Rana @ Bhagirath Vishwakarma
       4. Chinta Devi, aged about 67 years, wife of Shri Basudeo Rana
       5. Soniya Devi @ Soni Devi, aged about 61 years, wife of Shri Bhagirath
          Rana
       6. Lakhan Roy, aged about 59 years, son of late Chintamani Roy
          All are residents of village Bhandaridih (Bara Bhandari) P.O-
          Maheshmunda, P.S. Bengabad, District-Giridih
                                                             ...... ...      Petitioners
                               Versus
The State of Jharkhand                                 .....     ...     Opposite Party
                            --------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate Ms. Trishna Sagar, Advocate For the State : None

02/ 23.03.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with

Bengabad P.S. Case No. 174 of 2025, registered under sections 126(2), 115(2),

118(2), 109(1), 304(2), 351(2), 352 and 3 (5) of BNS, 2023, pending in the Court

of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is land

dispute between the parties and the land grabbers are trying to grab the land of

the petitioners and informant is also interested in grabbing the land and for that

altercation took place. She further submits that injury has been found to be simple.

On these grounds, she submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege

of anticipatory bail.

4. On repeated calls, nobody appeared on behalf of the State.

5. Considering that there is land dispute between the parties and injury

has been found to be simple which has come in the order of the learned Sessions

Judge and in that view of the matter petitioners are directed to surrender before

the learned court within two weeks from today and the learned court shall release

the petitioners on terms and conditions and sureties as learned court deems fit and ( 2026:JHHC:8080 )

proper.

6. This anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

Dt.23.03.2026                                       ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
satyarthi-