Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3310 (JHR)

VISHWAJIT KUMAR SINGH ALIAS BISHWAJIT KUMAR SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./586/2025 · 2025-01-28

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 586 of 2025 ------ Vishwajit Kumar Singh @ Bishwajit Kumar Singh, aged about 48 years, son of Sushil Kumar Singh, resident of Palbahiyar, P.O.-Balidih, P.S.-Balidih, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Madhaw Mohan Singh @ Alok Kumar Singh @ Alok Mohan Singh, aged about 43 years, son of late Madan Mohan Singh, resident of Telmocho, P.O.-Ram Nagar Garh, P.S.-Mahuda, Dist.-Dhanbad, Jharkhand … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kr. Sah, Advocate : Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 28.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 15096 of 2023 registered under sections 467/ 468/419/406/420 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that on the basis of the forged document, the petitioner has secured appointment in SAIL, Bokaro Steel Plant in General/DP category. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the employer has no grievance against the petitioner. It is then submitted that the complainant is no way associated with the employer of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has secured a job in the year 2007 and this complaint case was filed only in the year 2023 and only to harass the petitioner, this false case has been foisted. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs. 10,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad, in connection with Complaint Case No. 15096 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-