Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4322 (JHR)

SHASHIKANT KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./402/2026 · 2026-01-27

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[ 2026:JHHC:1909] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 402 of 2026 Shashikant Kumar, aged about 27 years, Son of Manoj Kumar, R/o Barmasia, Pani Tanki, P.O. & P.S. Dhansar, District-Dhanbad. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ishan Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. ------ 07/ 27.01.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 404 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 504, 501 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that false allegation is made against the petitioner of taking Rs. 10 lakhs from the informant on the false pretext of providing job in the Railway and further in the similar circumstance, the family members of this petitioner have already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3257 of 2024 by the co-ordinate bench of this court. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the main allegation is against this petitioner of taking money on the false pretext of providing job and also making forged and fabricated documents of the Railway. 5. Considering that the allegations are there against the petitioner of cheating of Rs. 10 lakhs from the informant on the basis [ 2026:JHHC:1909] -2- of forged and fabricated documents prepared by this petitioner and the family members of this petitioner have been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail on the ground that the main allegation is against this petitioner, as such, the case of the petitioner is not coming within the principle of parity, as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, named above. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-27.01.2026 Amitesh/-