D.K.PANDEY ALIAS DEEPAK KUMAR PANDEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./5263/2025 · 2025-09-10
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24439 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24439 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:27586
--1-- A.B.A. No. 5263 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 5263 of 2025
----
1. D.K. Pandey @ Deepak Kumar Pandey, aged about 38 years, S/o Sri Anil Pandey, resident of village – Chaderia, PO and PS – Gola Bazar, District – Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
2. Sonu Singh @ Shivprakash Chand, aged about 40 years, S/o Dayashankar, resident of village – Nanhe, PO and PS – Rajgarh, District – Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
3. Hari Shankar Yadav, aged about 38 years, S/o Jagannath Yadav, resident of village – Awasthi, PO and PS – Gola Bazar, District – Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
4. Pradeep Chand, aged about 41 years, S/o Harikant Chand, resident of Narre Buzurg, PO and PS – Rajgarh, District – Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
.... Petitioners -- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand
.... Opposite Party
----
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Amitabh, Advocate
:- Mr. Brij N. Sinha, Advocate
For the State
:- Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate
---- 03/10.09.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Simariya P.S. Case No.82 of 2022 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 467, 468, 491, 406, 420, 120(B) and 34 of Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned ACJM, Chatra.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that
2025:JHHC:27586
--2-- A.B.A. No. 5263 of 2025
false allegations are made against the petitioners of forming the company namely Organic India Agrotec and not distributing the plants and seeds at the level of Panchayat, Block, Sub-Division and District. He submits that the petitioners have not taken any amount and the amount alleged have been taken by accused Nos.15 and 16 namely Ravi Gupta and Rajvir Singh @ Raj Singh. He submits that the case is arising out of contract and the petitioner has also received the notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.
4.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that even the notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. has not been complied with.
5. In view of the above and considering that the amount alleged has been taken by accused Nos.15 and 16 namely Ravi Gupta and Rajvir Singh @ Raj Singh and those accused persons are not the petitioners in the present ABA and the petitioners have received the notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and in that view of the matter the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and the learned Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Sangam/