Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15346 (JHR)

DHIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH ALIAS DHIRENDRA SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2821/2026 · 2026-05-29

Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:15674 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 2821 of 2026 --- 1. Dhirendra Kumar Singh @ Dhirendra Singh 2. Birendra Kumar Singh @ Birendra Singh @ Virendra Rana 3. Dilip Kumar Singh @ Dilip Singh 4. Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Sanjay Singh @ Pappu Kumar Singh @ Pappu Singh 5. Rupa Singh @ Sushma Kumari 6. Anju Devi 7. Lawlesh Kumar Singh @ Nawlesh Singh @ Navlesh Singh 8. Taramani Kumari @ Taramany Kumari @ Mani Devi 9. Malti Devi. … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : A.P.P. --- 2/29.05.2026 Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Katkamsandi P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025. It has been alleged that the accused persons had entered into the house of the informant and forcibly taken away various articles as well as started demolishing asbestos sheet on the roof. It has further been alleged that the accused persons were intending to grab the landed property of the informant which was purchased by the informant in the year 2016 for a consideration amount of Rs.6,60,000/-. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations levelled in the first information report -2- indicates that there was a land dispute between both the sides and which resulted in the false implication of the petitioners. It has been submitted that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature and the falsity of the allegations would be evident from the fact that all the members of the family including females have been implicated. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Regard being had to the generality of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and the fact that there appears to be the existence of a land dispute between both the parties which perhaps had resulted in the institution of the first information report, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners above named are directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks and pray for bail, and in that event, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh in connection with Katkamsandi P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This application stands allowed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Dated- 29th May, 2026 Abhiraj/- Uploaded on 02/06/2026