Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40348 (JHR)

KISHORE THAKUR ALIAS PREM KUMAR KAPUR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./6950/2025 · 2025-12-10

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:37197 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6950 of 2025 ---- Kishore Thakur @ Prem Kumar Kapur, son of Ram Charan Thakur, aged about 59 years, resident of Hehal, Patratu, PO and PS Barkakana, District- Ramgarh .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Rajesh Kr Mahatha, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Advocate ---- 2/10.12.2025 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No.155 of 2024, for offence registered under section 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the IPC, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that false allegations are made against the petitioner of impersonating and selling of the land. He further submits that Amar Nath Pandey has cheated the petitioner by informing him about sale and purchase of the alleged land. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that the land in question was purchased by the petitioner in connivance of Amar Nath Pandey. He further submits that he has impersonated one Prem Kumar Kapoor and prepared forged and fabricated document and cheated huge amount of money by selling the landed property. He also submits that anticipatory bail of Amar Nath Pandey has been rejected. 5. Looking to the contents of the FIR it transpires that the land was purchased in the name of the petitioner by Amar Nath Pandey and it has come that the petitioner has impersonated Prem Kumar Kapoor and has prepared forged and fabricated documents and cheated huge amount by selling the landed property and anticipatory bail of Amar Nath Pandey has already been rejected by this Court, and in the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner is, hereby, rejected, and as such, this anticipatory bail application is, hereby, rejected. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 10.12.2025 SI/