Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15575 (JHR)

RAJKISHORE YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2864/2026 · 2026-06-02

Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:15965 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2864 of 2026 Rajkishore Yadav ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate For the State : Ms. Priya Shreshtha, Spl.P.P. (through VC) --- Order No. 02/ Dated: 2nd June, 2026 Heard Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Spl.P.P. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025. 3. It is alleged that the petitioner who is a Constable in the Indian Reserve Battalion, impersonated Babulal Kumar to secure employment. 4. Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was successful in his selection in the Indian Reserve Battalion and after proper verification, he was given the appointment letter. 5. It has been submitted that the petitioner is working in the Indian Reserve Battalion since 25.06.2010 and he has an impeccable service record. 6. Learned counsel submits that merely on account of complaint made by one Pankaj Kumar, the identity of the petitioner has sought to be destabilized and it is alleged that the petitioner is one Babulal Kumar and not Rajkishore Yadav. 7. Learned Spl.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 8. It appears that after due verification, the petitioner was appointed in Indian Reserve Battalion and he is working for more than 15 years without any complaints. Certain materials have been collected which indicates that the petitioner is not Rajkishore Yadav but Babulal Kumar. 9. However, considering the fact that the petitioner was employed after successfully completing the verification process and he is in service for more than 15 years, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. ( 2026:JHHC:15965 ) 2 10. Accordingly, the petitioner above named is directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks and pray for bail, and in that event, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 11. This application stands allowed. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 2nd June, 2026 Vedanti/- Uploaded on 5th June, 2026