Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18989 (JHR)

AJAY KUMAR @ AJAY KUMAR YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./3587/2026 · 2026-07-06

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[ 2026:JHHC:19759] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3587 of 2026 Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Kumar Yadav, aged about 28 years, son of Dinesh Mohan, resident of Village- Nawadih, P.Ο.- Rampur, P.S.- Chauparan, District- Hazaribagh. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mrs. Nanda Kumari, Advocate. ------ 05/ 06.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jainagar (Telaiya Dam O.P.) P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, registered for the offence under Sections 69, 89, 115(2), 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner and the informant were come into contact since the year 2022, wherein the FIR has been lodged on 11.02.2026. He next submits that in the meantime, she has gone along with the petitioner at Kolkata and allegations are made of establishing the relationship on the pretext of marriage. He next submits that the informant is major and what has happened that is consensual in nature. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State and learned counsel [ 2026:JHHC:19759] -2- appearing for the informant have jointly opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of establishing the relationship on the false pretext of marriage. On these grounds, they submit that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. In the FIR, it has come that the petitioner and the informant have come into contact in the year 2022 and the allegation of establishing the relationship is there since 2023, wherein the FIR has been lodged on 11.02.2026, prima facie, it appears what has happened that was consensual. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma, in connection with Jainagar (Telaiya Dam O.P.) P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-06.07.2026 Amitesh/-