Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1820 (JHR)

RAM JANAM PRASAD v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./11833/2025 · 2026-02-24

Rajesh Kumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:5340 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 11833 of 2025 .... Ram Janam Prasad aged about 48 Years, S/O Banarasi Prasad R/O Village-Karakat Ward No.1, P.O. & P.S.-Latehar, District-Latehar (Jharkhand) .… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party .... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Petitioner : Mr. K.S.Nanda, Adv. For the State : Mr. V.K.Vashistha, Spl. P.P. .... 03/24.02.2026 1. The applicant who is in custody since 30.10.2025 has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Seraikella P.S. Case No.164 of 2019, registered for the offence under Sections 419/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471 of IPC, pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Seraikella. 2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant(s) that complete set of F.I.R. alongwith its enclosure have been annexed with this bail application and there is no suppression on his/her part. 3. Innocence has been claimed and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that although the money has credited in the account of this applicant but it has not been withdrawn rather the amount has been reverted to the Government account. Further the applicant has no criminal antecedent. On the above basis prayer for bail has been made. 4. Learned Spl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that this is a case of cloning of cheque and it is a crime committed in an organized manner. 5. Considering the above facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the applicant stands rejected. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 24.02.2026 Shahid/ Uploaded on 25.02.2026