Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:12575 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
A.B.A. No. 1914 of 2026
---- Suman Kumar, aged about 27 years, son of Ramtu Prasad Mahto, resident of Village Doman Kita, PO and PS Mahagama, District Godda
.... Petitioner -- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Mukesh Kumar Das, son of Sargun Harijan, resident of Village Shashthri Nagar, Khijuria, PO and PS Dumka, District Dumla
.... Opposite Party
----
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner
:- Mr. Sanjeev Thakur, Advocate
For the State
:- Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, Advocate
For the Informant
:- Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, Advocate Mr. Varun Prabhakar, Advocate
---- 2/29.04.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dumka Town PS Case No.301 of 2023, for offence registered under section 419/420/34 of IPC, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka.
3.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that so far as the petitioner is concerned, he has nothing to do with the letter in question and the allegations are made of taking amount of Rs.7,41,000/- on the pretext of providing job. He next submits that no money has been received by the petitioner.
4. Learned State counsel as well as the learned counsel for the informant jointly oppose the prayer and submit that allegations are
2026:JHHC:12575 2
there of taking the amount in question and even the forged appointment letter has been handed over to the informant.
5.
Looking to the contents of the FIR it transpires that the petitioner is named in the FIR and the allegations are there that the petitioner along with others have induced the informant to pay Rs.7,41,000/- for employment and even the employment letter has been provided by them which was found to be forged one, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and as such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected. Consequently, A.B.A. No.1914 of 2026 is, hereby, dismissed.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 29.04.2026 SI/