ABHISHEK TURI @ GOLDEN TURI @ ABHISEK KUMAR v. STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./2128/2026 · 2026-05-06
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13166 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13166 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[ 2026:JHHC:13453] -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 2128 of 2026
Abhishek Turi @ Golden Turi @ Abhisek Kumar, aged about- 19 years son of Dipak Turi, resident of Village Gidhni, P.O. & P.S.- Jasidih, District- Deoghar (Jharkhand).
..... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
..... … Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate.
: Mr. Pramod Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the State
: Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. ------ 06/ 06.05.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No. 141 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of confessional statement. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner.
4.
Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioner is also the accomplice of the persons, who have fired upon the deceased, pursuant to that the deceased has died. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.
[ 2026:JHHC:13453] -2-
5.
From the order of the learned Sessions Judge, it transpires that in para-42 of the case diary it has come that accused persons have taken the name of this petitioner. The learned Sessions Judge has also considered the video clip of the occurrence in course of hearing, wherein this petitioner along with other co-accused persons were found threatening the accused.
6.
In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-06.05.2026 Amitesh/-