SHATRUGHAN KUMAR ALLIAS SHATRUDHAN SAW v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPTT OF HOME, JAIL AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT
W.P.(Cr.)/296/2026 · 2026-06-09
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16060 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16060 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:16570 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(Cr.) No. 296 of 2026
Satrughan Kumar @ Shatrudhan Saw, S/o Kailash Saw, R/o Village- Sadama, P.O. + P.S.- Chhattarpur, District- Palamau, Jharkhand
... … Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Jail & Disaster Management officiating at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
2. The Director General of Police, Government of Jharkhand at Police Headquarter, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
3. Deputy Commissioner, Palamu at Medininagar, P.O. & P.S.- Medininagar, District- Palamu (Daltonganj).
4. Superintendent of Police, Palamu at Medininagar, P.O. & P.S.- Medininagar, District- Palamu (Daltonganj).
5. Officer-in-Charge, Chhattarpur, P.O. & P.S.- Chhattarpur, District- Palamu (Daltonganj).
... … Respondents
---------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
--------- For the Petitioner : Ms. Anjana Kumari, Adv. For the Resp.-State : A.C. to G.A.-III
---------
02/09.06.2026 Heard Ms. Anjana Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned G.A.-III for the respondent-State.
In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to pay adequate compensation on account of the illegal detention of the petitioner in connection with Chhatarpur (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the wife of the petitioner had filed a false case against the petitioner as a result of which the petitioner was taken into custody but subsequently, he was acquitted in the said case and, therefore, the detention of the petitioner in custody itself was illegal.
Merely, because the petitioner has been acquitted in a criminal case instituted by his wife his
detention in custody based on the institution of the case cannot be said to be an illegal detention and having found no merit in this writ application, the same is hereby dismissed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Dated, the 9th June, 2026 A. Sanga/- Uploaded on 11 /06/2026
-2-