RAHUL KUMAR ALIAS RAHUL KUMAR SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./6457/2025 · 2026-03-18
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9722 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9722 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[ 2026:JHHC:7575] -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 6457 of 2025
Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Singh, aged about 24 years, son of Dinanath Singh, resident of H. No. 42, Raghuwar Nagar, Long Town Basti, P.O. & P.S.- Burmamines, Town-Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum.
..... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
..... … Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate.
For the State
: Mrs. Lily Sahay, P.P. ------
03/ 18.03.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned P.P for the State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Birsa Nagar P.S. Case No. 88 of 2024, registered for the offence under Section 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of confessional statement. On these grounds, he submits that privilege of anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner.
4.
Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that from the possession of the petitioner, one loaded country made pistol and three live cartridges were recovered, that has come in para-50 of the case diary.
5.
In view of the above and considering the allegation that one Akash Kumar was teaching a Class-12 batch in the coaching centre, when unknown object pierced the opaque glass window and
[ 2026:JHHC:7575] -2-
entered the class room, which caused injury and the petitioner is said to be the accomplish and further from his possession, the recovery has been made and that has come in para-50 of the case diary.
6.
In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to provide the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-18.03.2026 Amitesh/-