Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6209 (JHR)

SUPRIYA SARKAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1643/2026 · 2026-04-16

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:10860 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 1643 of 2026 ---- 1.Supriya Sarkar aged about 36 years son of Sujit Sarkar resient of Village Kahinagar Post Beniagram Police Station Farakka District Murshidabad State West Bengal 2.Arsil Sk, aged about 26 years son of Sademan Ali, resident of Samaspur, Post Samaspur, Police Station Jafarganj, Dist. Murshidabad, West Bengal 3.Namdar Sk, aged about 36 years, son of Taimur Sk, resident of Samaspur, Post Samaspur, Police Station Jafarganj, Dist. Murshidabad, West Bengal .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate ---- 2/16.04.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioners and for State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kandra PS Case No.32 of 2025, for offence registered under section 319(2), 318(4), 303(2), 316(2), 316(3), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Seraikella. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners of different trucks and the allegations are made that on the trucks sponge iron was loaded from OCL Iron Steel Limited at Kandra which was meant for transporting to Balajee Mini Steels and Rerolling Private Limited Bihta (Patna).He next submits that the allegations are made that however, the sponge iron 2026:JHHC:10860 -2- has not reached to its destination. He next submits that if any mischief is done, that has been done by the drivers and the petitioners happened to be the owners of different trucks and the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in paragraph no.17. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that the alleged sponge iron has not reached to its destination. 5. Considering that the petitioners are the owners of three different trucks and the allegations are made of not reaching of the said sponge iron to its destination and it has been pointed out that the said trucks were being driven by the drivers and the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent as aforesaid, and in that facts and circumstances of the instant case, the petitioners, above named, are, hereby, directed to surrender before learned court within two weeks from today, and learned court shall release the petitioners, above named, on such terms and conditions as well as sureties as the learned court may deem fit and proper. 6. A.B.A. No. 1643 of 2026 is disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 16.04.2026 SI/