2026:JHHC:3127 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.3526 of 2025 1. Ram Brind Singh, aged about 63 years, son of Jagarnath Singh, Resident of Patel Nagar Fatwa, Sonaru More, P.O. and P.S. Fatwa, District -Patna, State Bihar. 2. Ram Brit Singh @ Ram Brith Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Harihar Singh, Resident of Ward No. 08, Niyazipur, P.O. and P.S. Fatwa, District -Patna, State Bihar. …. Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand through A.C.B., Vigilance … Opp. Party -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate. For the ACB : Mr. Deepankar, Advocate ------ 2/05.02.2026 Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the ACB. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 27th April 2017 passed by the learned Special Judge (ACB) Daltonganj, Palamu, in connection of with Vigilance Case No.21 of 2003, arising out of vigilance P.S. Case No.19 of 2003, registered under sections 409, 420 and 120B of IPC and under section 13(i)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and by the impugned order, the learned court has been pleased to cancel the bail bond of the petitioners and directed to issue NBW against the petitioners. The prayer is also made for quashing the order dated 6/8/2025, whereby the learned Special Judge (ACB), Daltonganj, Palamau has again issued NBW against the petitioners. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have moved before this court in ABA No. 423 of 2004 and he has been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 01/1/2004. He next submits that later on, the charge sheet has been 2026:JHHC:3127 2 submitted on 29/3/2011 and the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance on 2/4/2011. He next submits that thereafter, the case has been transferred from the Court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance) Ranchi to the court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Daltonganj, Palamu by order dated 17/7/2012 and the same was received there on 2/8/2012. He next submits that the petitioners were not knowing the transfer of the said record from the court of Ranchi to the court of Palamau and in view of that, the petitioners are not able to appear before the learned court. He next submits that the petitioners will appear, however the impugned order may kindly be kept in abeyance. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the ACB opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioners have not appeared before the learned court and in view of that the petitioners have invited the orders. According to him, there is no illegality in the impugned order of the learned court. 5. It is admitted position that the case record has been transferred from the court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Ranchi to the court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Daltonganj, Palamu. The petitioners were already granted anticipatory bail and it has been pointed out that the petitioners were not knowing about the transfer of the case from the court of Ranchi to the court of Daltonganj. 6. In that view of the matter, the petitioners are directed to appear before the learned court on or before 23rd February 2026. 7. If the petitioners will appear before the learned court on or before that day, the impugned order shall not be given effect and the 2026:JHHC:3127 3 petitioners will allow to remain on bail on the same bail bond. However, if the petitioners failed to comply the above order, the learned court shall take all coercive steps against the petitioners. 8. This petition is allowed with the above observation and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 05.02.2026 R.Kumar