Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8812 (JHR)

RAJ KISHORE PRASAD ALIAS RAJ KISHORE MEHTA v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.A(DB)/1600/2025 · 2026-01-06

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, Rongon Mukhopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:115-DB Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A (D.B.) No. 1600 of 2025 --------- Raj Kishore Prasad @ Raj Kishore Mehta, aged -51 years. S/o- Sri Pokhnath Mehta, R/o- Village- Gunja, P.O. + P.S.-Ichak. District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Ankit Apoorva, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashishta, Spl.P.P. ----------- 02/Dated: 06th January, 2026 1. Heard Mr. Ankit Apoorva, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.10.2025 passed in A.B.P. No. 1762 of 2025 arising out of Ichak P.S. Case No. 230 of 2023 by the learned Sessions Judge at Hazaribagh, whereby and whereunder the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected. 3. It has been alleged that on a secret information, a raid was conducted in a stone quarry and in course of inspection, some of the workers who were present, had managed to flee away. Several incriminating articles including detonators, wires etc. were recovered from the place of occurrence. 4. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant does not have any concern with the said stone quarry. It has further been submitted that the appellant has been implicated at the behest of the police as cases of similar nature has also been instituted against the appellant. 2026:JHHC:115-DB Page | 2 5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has submitted that the appellant has got several criminal antecedents of similar nature. 6. It appears that from 2016 onwards, 04 cases have been instituted against the appellant. The allegation is of illegal mining with help of detonators and on consideration of aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 14.10.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1762 of 2025 arising out of Ichak P.S. Case No. 230 of 2023 by the learned Sessions Judge at Hazaribagh and consequently, we dismiss this appeal. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Date:- 06th January, 2026. Amar/- Uploaded