2026:JHHC:12761 --1-- A.B.A. No. 2145 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2145 of 2026 ---- Ajay Kumar Yadav, aged about 46 years, son of Rasila Yadav, resident of Kuju, Murpa, PO – Kuju, PS – Mandu, District – Ramgarh .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electricity Supply Sub-Division, Gomia, PO and PS – Gomia, District - Ramgarh .... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Praveen Shankar Dayal, Advocate For the State :- Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Advocate For the JUVNL :- Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate ---- 02/30.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the JUVNL. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mandu (W.B.) P.S. Case No.184 of 2025 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 135 and 138 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge-I, Ramgarh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that allegations are made of pilfering electricity to the tune of Rs.35,21,520/- for operating hard coke plant. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has surfaced on the basis of 2026:JHHC:12761 --2-- A.B.A. No. 2145 of 2026 submission made by proprietor namely Manoj Kumar Agrawal, who was the Director of the said plant. He next submits that power of attorney has been executed in favour of the petitioner and only for that the petitioner has been implicated. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the JUVNL opposed the prayer and submits that through the power of attorney the petitioner was also liable for the business of the said plant. He submits in view of that the petitioner is also liable for the said loss to the JUVNL. 5. In the course of argument, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner produced the power of attorney which has been taken on record. From reading of power of attorney, it transpires that the petitioner was entrusted in running of the coke plant and the allegations are there of pilfering the electricity to the tune of Rs.35,21,520/- and it has come in the order of learned Sessions Judge that in paragraph No.26 of the case diary said Manoj Kumar Agrawal, who is said to be Director of the said coke plant stated that he is only Director of the Mill whereas the petitioner Ajay Kumar Yadav has power of attorney being Manager of the Mill. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 30.04.2026 Sangam/