Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4930 (JHR)

ARSHAD KHAN v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1009/2025 · 2025-07-02

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:17522 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1009 of 2025 ------ Arshad Khan son of Mofil Khan, resident of Teliyatand, P.O and P.S. Chandwa, District- Latehar, Jharkhand. .....Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Vicitm … Opp. Party(s). ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalyan Roy, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P For the Informant: Mr. Nandan Prasad, Advocate. …..... 05/02.07.2025: This anticipatory bail application under Section(s) 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Section(s) 376, 506 and 313 IPC in connection with Mahila Thana P.S. Case No. 12/2024, pending in the Court of learned CJM, Latehar. 2. Heard the parties at length and had gone through the documents, annexed along with this application. 3. Opportunity was given to the State as well as informant to oppose the bail, which they availed and opposed. 4. Admittedly the petitioner is praying for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. During course of argument, counsel for the parties at the very outset submit that in this case chargesheet has already been submitted against the petitioner under 498A and 323 IPC and cognizance has already been taken, thereafter the summons have been issued. 6. When cognizance has already been taken in a case after submission of chargesheet, this Court fails to understand what is the apprehension of the petitioner being arrested. He has to appear before the cognizance taking Court answering the summons. Once the petitioner appears, the Court will pass an appropriate order in view of the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 as well as the observation made in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. Anu/-C.P.-3 (ANANDA SEN, J.)