Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24263 (JHR)

NARESH KUMAR v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./4880/2026 · 2026-08-28

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:25944 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 4880 of 2026 1. Naresh Kumar, aged about 47 years, son of Jageshwar Mahto 2. Anup Mehta, aged about 45 years, sonof Narsingh Prasad Mehta 3. Shanikant Mehta, aged about 39 years, son of Indradeo Prasad Mehta 4. Arun Kumar, aged about 49 years, son of Chandradhari Mahto All 1 to 4, residents of village +P.O. Ichak, P.S. Churchu, District- Hazaribag-825402 (Jharkhand) 5. Pramod Kumar, aged about 51 years, son of Badi Prasad Mehta, resident of village and P.O. Sindur, P.S. Sadar, District-Hazaribag- 825301 (Jharkhand) ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, A.P.P. 02/ 28.08.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 156 of 2015, registered under section 379 of I.P.C., under Rules, 3/8 of JMMC Rules, and under section 4(1)A/21 of the MMDR Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hazaribag. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are owner of crusher machine for that they obtained licences however the licences were expired in the year, 2014. He next submits that petitioners earlier applied for renewal of their licences and subsequently licences were renewed but in the intervening period F.I.R was instituted on certain allegations. He next submits that co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in different A.B.As contained in annexure-2 series. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits ( 2026:JHHC:25944 ) that allegations are there of running crusher machine illegally. 5. Considering that in identical situation co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in different A.B.As contained in annexure-2 series and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hazaribag, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 156 of 2015, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.28.08.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-