Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14161 (JHR)

RISHABHRAJ SINGH ALIAS RISHABH v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2782/2025 · 2025-06-09

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:14868 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2782 of 2025 ----- Rishabhraj Singh @ Rishabh, son of late Ashok Singh, resident of Ashok Sadan, E-11, Liberty Colony, Sarvoday Nagar, Indira nagar, P.O and P.S. Gazipur, District- Lucknow, U.P. ...... Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Vaishali Singh, daughter of Rakesh Singh, wife of Rishabhraj Singh, resident of Panchwati Nagar, Behind ITI Bus Stand, Near Pahar, P.O and P.S. Pandra (O.P), Sukhdevnagar, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Opp. Party(s). ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : M/s Aprajita Mishra and A.K. Mishra, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, A.P.P. …..... 02/09.06.2025: This anticipatory bail application has have been filed by the petitioner praying for grant of anticipatory bail in terms of sections 482 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the petitioner has been allegedly implicated in connection with Sukhdeonagar (P) P.S. Case No. 182 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under sections 498(A) of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned J.M., Ranchi. Heard the parties and had gone through the documents, annexed along with this application. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and after three months of the occurrence, a false case has been lodged against the petitioner. Counsel for the State after taking instructions submits that thrice notices under Sections 41A Cr.P.C have been issued but the petitioner did not choose to appear before the Investigating Officer. Considering the submission of the State and the fact that notices have been issued under Section 41A Cr.P.C, which the petitioner did not comply with, which is admitted by the petitioner, I am not inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application as the petitioner has not cooperated with the investigation. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected. Anu/-C.P.-3 (ANANDA SEN, J.)