Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21831 (JHR)

VIVEKANAND TUMBLIA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./4068/2026 · 2026-07-24

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:21927] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4068 of 2026 Vivekanand Tumblia, aged about 32 years, S/o- Yogendra Tumblia, Resident of Village Bara Lagia, P.O.-Bara Lagia, P.S. Chaibasa Muffasil, District- West Singhbhum. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Amrita Kumari, A.P.P. ------ 04/ 24.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 145 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 47(a) and 55 of the Excise Act, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has moved before this court in A.B.A. No. 4344 of 2023, which was later on dismissed as withdrawn and the petitioner has again moved before this court in A.B.A. No. 2990 of 2024, which has further been rejected. He next submits that at present, there is change in circumstance and in view of that, the third anticipatory bail has been filed. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that earlier twice the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner has been rejected and further no fresh ground has been stated in the petition to entertain this third anticipatory bail application. [2026:JHHC:21927] -2- 5. Earlier twice the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner was rejected and nothing new has been argued and further nothing new ground has been stated in this third anticipatory bail petition to entertain this petition. 6. In view of the above, no fresh ground is made out to entertain this anticipatory bail application. As such, this petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-24.07.2026 Amitesh/-