SUJEET KUMAR SINGH ALIAS SUJEET KUMAR ALIAS KUJEET SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./1601/2026 · 2026-04-15
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6082 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6082 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:10760
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 1601 of 2026
---- Sujeet Kumar Singh @ Sujeet Kumar @ Kujeet Singh, aged 30 years, son of Kalendra Singh, resident of Village Kirigara, Terpa, PO Terpa, PS and District Ramgarh, Jharkhand.... Petitioner -- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand
.... Opposite Party
----
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner
:- Ms Arti Kumari, Advocate
For the State
:- Mr. Shailesh Kr Sinha, Advocate
---- 2/15.04.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jariyagarh PS. Case No.8 of 2025, for offence registered under section 317, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and section 30(ii) of Coal Mines Act and section 33 of the Indian Forest Act, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier moved in ABA No.5363 of 2025 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to move before the learned court. He next submits that on the fresh ground, the anticipatory bail application has been filed and as such anticipatory bail may kindly be granted.
4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that considering that the petitioner is having two criminal antecedents, and he has not complied the notice issued under section 35(3) of the BNS, 2023 and earlier anticipatory bail application was decided and the petitioner has withdrawn the same with liberty to move before the learned court.
5. The petitioner has already withdrawn the earlier anticipatory bail application with liberty to move before the learned court and that order was passed after considering the merit of the case and in course of the argument, no fresh ground has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner for entertaining the second anticipatory bail application, and in that view of the matter, this petition, is, hereby, dismissed.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 15.04.2026 SI/