Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25360 (JHR)

BARKHA SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./6107/2024 · 2025-05-06

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:13750 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.6107 of 2024 ------ 1. Barkha Singh 2. Jaggu Singh … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Neelam Jaiswal, wife of Pramod Kumar. … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. Mr. P.S. Dayal, Advocate Mr. Vikash Anand, Advocate ----- 08/ 06.05.2025 This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.5279 of 2023, for offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 504 IPC. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. 2. Learned counsel representing the opposite parties submits that the parties have resolved their disputes and the grievance of the complainant has already been redressed. 3. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is of fraudulent practices on the pretext of sale and purchase of land. 4. Admitted fact is that the case arises out of a complaint. Cognizance has been taken in this case. 5. In a complaint case, there is no question of custodial interrogation. The only fact which the Court has to be assured of is 2025:JHHC:13750 2 whether the accused will face the trial or not or whether there is any chance of tampering with the evidence. 6. Since the cognizance has already been taken in this case, there is no apprehension of arrest of the petitioners being arrested. 7. Further, the impugned order does not suggest any of the aforesaid situation. Thus, the petitioners are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court, who will consider the aforesaid fact and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in 2022 (10) SCC 51, Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in 2024 (9) SCC 198 and Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. 8. With the aforesaid observation, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3