RAM PRAKSH VERMA ALLIAS PRAKESH VERMA v. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH VIGILANCE(A.C.B.)
B.A./2905/2026 · 2026-04-23
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7146 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7146 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:11895
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 2905 of 2026
Dr. Ram Prakash Verma @ Ram Prakash Verma, Aged about 62 years, Son of Late Uma Shankar Verma … … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Vigilance (A.C.B.)
… … Opposite Party ---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Advocate
---
04/23.04.2026
Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2026 in connection with Hazaribagh ACB P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026, registered under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, now pending in the court of learned A.D.J. II cum Spl. Judge Vigilance (A.C.B) Hazaribagh.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is alleged that the petitioner deputed as District Ayush Medical Officer, Chatra demanded a bribe money of Rs. 20,000/- for releasing the salary of four months of the complainant, who has been working as Ayush Community Health Officer in Ayushman Arogya Mandir, Rajkiya Ayurvedik Aushdhalya, Tandwa, Chatra. He submits that the petitioner is alleged to have been apprehended red handed with bribe money and he is in custody since 02.02.2026. He also submits that Charge sheet has been submitted on 11.03.2026.
4.
Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner has been caught red handed with bribe money.
5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner who is said to have been caught with bribe money, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and hence, this bail application is rejected.
2026:JHHC:11895
2
6. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months.
7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:23.04.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:24.04.2026