Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1541 (JHR)

BABLU KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./16/2026 · 2026-01-08

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:358 --1-- A.B.A. No. 16 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 16 of 2026 ---- Bablu Kumar, aged about 35 years, son of Santosh Kumar Singh, resident of village – Latu, PO – Phulsu, PS – Bariatu, District – Latehar .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Mrs. Amrita Kumari, Advocate ---- 03/08.01.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Khelgaon P.S. Case No.03 of 2025, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 318(3) and 338 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, XXVIII, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that due to financial crisis the petitioner had no option but to sell the jewelleries of his wife and when the same was brought in the knowledge of the informant, the informant proposed to buy the jewelleries of the petitioners and in lieu of this an agreement was executed on 09.12.2024 and thereafter the informant has issued four cheques bearing No.919211, 919212, 919213 and 919214 of Rs.5 lakhs each of Punjab National Bank, Shahpur Branch, Nawada 2026:JHHC:358 --2-- A.B.A. No. 16 of 2026 and thereafter kept the jewelleries of the petitioner’s wife with him and in the said agreement the wife of the informant namely Shobha Devi had also signed as a witness and the said agreement has been annexed as Annexure-2. He further submits that in the FIR itself it has been stated that the petitioner herein is trying to lodge a case in light of agreement and in view of that prior of lodging of the case by the petitioner the informant is lodging the present case against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the allegations are there against the petitioner of taking Rs.14,80,000/- in cash. 5. Annexure-2 is a document which is an agreement and in the said agreement the photocopy of the cheques have also been annexed and in the FIR itself it has been stated that since the apprehension is there that the petitioner will lodge a case relating to the said agreement and in view of that prior of lodging of the case by the petitioner the present case is being lodged. In the attending facts and circumstance of this case, I am inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of 2026:JHHC:358 --3-- A.B.A. No. 16 of 2026 the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, XXVIII, Ranchi in connection with Khelgaon P.S. Case No.03 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 08.01.2026 Sangam/