Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32996 (JHR)

SUMITA DEVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./6872/2025 · 2025-12-05

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:36442 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 6872 of 2025 1. Sumita Devi, aged about 45 years, wife of Dhaneshwar Yadav 2. Dhaneshwar Yadav, aged about49 years, son of Tulsi Gop Both are residents of village Upraili Bodra, Choutha, P.O. Bishnugarh, P.S. Bishnugarh, District-Hazaribagh, State-Jharkhand ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Vashistha, A.P.P. 02/ 05.12.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025, registered under sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 201, 427 and 120B of the I.P.C, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is Mukhia and petitioner no.2 is husband of petitioner no.1 and false allegation is made that under MNREGA scheme job was provided to a particular contractor during Covid-19. He also submits that entire work has been completed and on verification payment has been made to the concerned contractor. He then submits that petitioners are not related with said contractor. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of releasing the fund to a particular contractor being the head of village. 5. Considering that petitioner no.1 is Mukhia and petitioner no.2 is husband of petitioner no.1 and it course of argument it has been pointed ( 2025:JHHC:36442 ) out that petitioners have been implicated in two cases by the same informant and further it has been argued that entire work has been completed and particular contractor is not related with the petitioners. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.05.12.2025 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-