Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 441 (JHR)

PUJA KUMARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./24/2026 · 2026-01-08

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:430 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A.No. 24 of 2026 Puja Kumari, aged about 28 years, wife of Bablu Kumar, resident of Village Latu, PO Phulsu, P.S. Bariatu, District Latehar .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Ms Mahua Palit, Advocate ---- 2/08.01.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Khelgaon PS Case No.3 of 2025, for offence registered under section 318(3), 338 of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the husband of this petitioner has entered into an agreement of selling jewellery of the petitioner with the informant and in light of that, he has deposited the jewellery and four cheques were issued by the informant in favour of the husband of the petitioner. He further submits that the agreement has been annexed as Annexure-3 and in view of the said agreement the petitioner has signed as witness. He also submits that the cheques were not presented and in the FIR itself it has been stated that since the husband of the petitioner was intend to file the case relating to the agreement, and in view of that, prior to filing of the case by the husband of the petitioner, the present case has been filed. He next submits that the husband of the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail in ABA No.16 of 2026:JHHC:430 2 2026. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that allegations are there of taking the jewellery. 5. Annexure-3 is the document which suggest that there was an agreement between the husband of the petitioner and the informant and the petitioner is the signatory as witness in the said agreement. In the FIR it has been stated that since the husband of the petitioner was intend to file the case against the informant relating to the said agreement and in view of that, the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioner prior to lodging of the case by the husband of the petitioner and husband of the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail as aforesaid, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. 6. Accordingly, petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before learned court within four weeks from today, and in event of his surrender/arrest, petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of like amount each, to satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Ranchi, in connection with Khelgaon PS Case No.3 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 08.01.2026 SI/