Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18593 (JHR)

RAJENDRA YADAV @ UPENDRA YADAV v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./3460/2026 · 2026-07-01

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:19219 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 3460 of 2026 ---- Rajendra Yadav @ Upendra Yadav, aged about 39 years, son of Hemlal Yadav, resident of Village -Arwatand, PO-Naitand, PS- Dumri, District-Giridih .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Vijoy Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :- Mr. Govind Ray Karan, Advocate ---- 2/01.07.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dumri PS Case No.140 of 2025, for offence registered under section 126(2), 115(2), 109, 76, 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that falsely the petitioner has been implicated in this case and false allegations are made against the petitioner that the petitioner has caught hold the father-in-law of the informant and thereafter Mantu Yadav has assaulted by way of Farsa and thereafter the leg has been cut and detached from the body and he submits in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned State counsel as well as the learned counsel 2026:JHHC:19219 2 appearing on behalf of the respondent State jointly oppose the prayer and submit that the petitioner has a vital role in the said incident and in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the petitioner has caught hold the father-in-law of the informant and thereafter Mantu Yadav has cut the leg of the father-in-law of the informant which has been detached from the body and the petitioner has played a vital role in the said incident, and in view of that, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner, and as such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected and consequently, this anticipatory bail application being A.B.A.No.3460 of 2026 is, hereby, dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 01.07.2026 SI/