Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3535 (JHR)

PRAMOD KUMAR RAVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH ACB (VIGILANCE)

A.B.A./497/2026 · 2026-01-30

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:2416 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 497 of 2026 ---- Pramod Kumar Ravi, aged about 47 years, son of late Suresh Ram, resident of Village Bhaibigha, PO and PS Haidarnagar, District Palamu .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand, through ACB(Vigilance) .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Manoj Kumar No.2, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Advocate ---- 2/30.01.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Anti-Corruption Bureau, Palamau P.S. Case No.06/2023, for the offence registered under Sections 466, 467, 468, 471, 474, 409, 120(B) and 109 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (ACB), Palamau at Daltonganj. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner happened to be Asstt. Engineer (A.E.). He further submits that allegations are made that the entire construction work of thirteen school was done by a teacher namely Vishnupat Singh and he has nothing to do with the construction of school work of allotment of work. He then submits that since the other persons were not ready to take up the said work and in view of that said 2026:JHHC:2416 2 work was provided to Vishnupat Singh and to buttress this argument, he refers to Annexure-2 series which are letters issued by the different persons. He next submits that total work is of Rs.43,01,537 and the allegations are made that the defalcation of Rs.2,79,356/- has been done. He also submits that the petitioner is cooperating in the investigation. He submits that co-accused persons have already been provided anticipatory bail in A.B.A. Nos.1456 of 2024 and 4163 of 2024 and ABA No.7044 of 2025. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the ACB opposed the prayer on the ground that allegation of defalcation of Rs.2,79,356/- is there against the petitioner. 5. Considering that total work is of Rs.43,01,537/- wherein the allegation is made that defalcation of Rs.2,79,356/- is made and reasons of providing the work to Vishnupat Singh prima facie established in the light of Annexure-2 series and further the coaccused person has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in aforesaid ABAs. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to provide privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of 2026:JHHC:2416 3 Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge (ACB), Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Anti-Corruption Bureau, Palamau P.S. Case No.06/2023, Vigilance Case No.06 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 30.01.2026 SI/