Two anticipatory bail applications arising from one FIR under Sections 406/420 IPC, alleging money taken for a Government job backed by a forged appointment letter. Mediation between parties failed. The court declined anticipatory bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 949 of 2024
Aditya Minz … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party With A.B.A. No. 967 of 2024 Anil Kumar … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhilash Kumar, Advocate (In both cases) For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P. (In A.B.A.-949/2024) Mr. Fahad Allam, A.P.P. (In A.B.A.-967/2024)
For the Informant : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate (In both cases)
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
04/07.05.2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the
State and learned counsel for the informant.
in both the cases, however, rejection order by the learned Sessions Judge is different and in view of that, both the A.B.As. are being heard together with consent of the parties.
-1- A.B.A. No. 949 of 2024
With
A.B.A. No. 967 of 2024
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
-2- A.B.A. No. 949 of 2024 With A.B.A. No. 967 of 2024
1 issue framed by the court
Should anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in a case of cheating by promising a Government job with a forged appointment letter?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Aditya Minz
Anil Kumar
The State of Jharkhand
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
