PRADEEP KUMAR RAY ALIAS SUBODH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./4560/2026 · 2026-09-11
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25872 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 25872 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[ 2026:JHHC:27401] -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 4560 of 2026
Pradeep Kumar Ray @ Subodh, aged about 31 years, son of Kunvar Ray, R/o Village Meral, P.S. Nagri Gutuwa, P.O. Nagri, District Ranchi.
..... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
..... … Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahay, Advocate. For the State
: Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 11.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Nagri P.S. Case No. 192 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 324(4), 305, 351(3) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class- XXIII, Ranchi.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is not indulged in any manner or demanded any money from the informant. He next submits that although the petitioner is having some criminal antecedents, however, so far as present case is concerned the petitioner is not indulged and the property in question belongs to this petitioner. 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 the petitioner is having the criminal antecedents and he is said to be a member of banned extremist group. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.
5.
The petitioner is having the criminal antecedent and
[ 2026:JHHC:27401] -2-
allegations are there of demolishing the house and even taking away the iron rods to the tune of Rs. 1,68,100/- and further allegations are there of making terror for extortion.
6.
In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-11.09.2026 Amitesh/-