Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8065 (JHR)

JIWAN KUMAR JALAN v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1763/2026 · 2026-04-30

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:12713 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No 1763 of 2026 1. Jiwan Kumar Jalan, aged about 70 years, son of late Surajmal Jalan 2. Raghav Jalan, aged about 39 years, son of Shri Jiwan Kumar Jalan Both residents of 101, Mangal Murti Height, Harmu Road, P.O. Ranchi, GPO, P.S.-Sukhdeo Nagar, District-Ranchi ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. Mrs. Malsi Pathak, Advocate 02/ 30.04.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 380 of 2012, registered under sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 419, 420 and 34 of the I.P.C (Sections 338, 339, 340, 316, 319, 318 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, respectively), pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have taken a term loan of Rs. 2.00 crores and cash credit facility of Rs. 1.40 crore and the said amount was utilized in the business and further the account was declared Non Performing Asset and inspite of that the F.I.R has been lodged by the bank. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that amount has been misappropriated and the said amount was not utilized on the heading for which it was drawn. He further submits that the intention of criminal breach of trust was there from the very beginning and in view of that the anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. ( 2026:JHHC:12713 ) 5. In order of the learned Sessions Judge it has been recorded that in para 5 of the case diary it has come that term loan of Rs. 2.00 crore and CC (H) facility of Rs. 1.40 crore was sanctioned to M/s BRSS Flour Mill (Pvt.) Ltd vide letter dated 08.02.2010 by Punjab National Bank, Argora Branch, Ranchi for running flour mill and all the goods were hypothecated to the bank as primary security. It has also been asserted that the loan amount was not utilized on the heading for which it was drawn and no healthy stocks were found and only few condemned flour bags and few bags of rotten wheat were found in factory premises indicating the depletion of securities. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners and accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Dt.30.04.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-