Dismissed¶¶21

Suraj Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Jul 2025A.B.A./1166/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail (ABA No. 1166 of 2025) under S. 482 & 484 BNSS 2023 for S. 394 IPC case (Gopikandar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2023, Dumka) dismissed by High Court of Jharkhand (Ananda Sen, J., 04.07.2025); motorcycle JH16D1507 used in crime traced to petitioner via case diary para 46; co-accused reportedly acquitted; bail refused as investigation, including TIP of petitioner, pending.

What did the court decide?

The registration number of the motorcycle used in commission of the crime is mentioned in the FIR, and as per Paragraph No. 46 of the Case Diary the motorcycle (JH16D1507) belongs to the petitioner. ¶¶18

Suraj Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2025)

¶1

( 2025:JHHC:18573 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1166 of 2025

¶3

------

¶4

Suraj Kumar Yadav, aged about 28 years, S/O Sri Ayodhya Yadav, R/O Village – gowalpara, PO & PS – Maheshpur, District – Pakur.

¶5

Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶6

-----CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶7

------

¶8

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate

¶9

For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashishtha, APP

¶10

04/ 09^th July 2025

¶11

1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 and 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Sections 394 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Gopikandar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate – 1^st Class, Dumka.

¶12

2. From the FIR, it is clear that the vehicle found from the miscreants, registration number of the one is JH16D1507.

¶13

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name of the petitioner transpired in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of coaccused and he has not committed any offence. He further submits that though the co-accused were put up on trial but they have been acquitted as the informant had stated that he could not identify him due to darkness.

¶14

4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that in this case a motorcycle which was used in committing crime, i.e., JH16D1507 belongs to the petitioner which is evident from Paragraph No. 46 of the case diary.

¶15

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties. I find that in the FIR, registration number of the motorcycle have been mentioned which were used

¶16

¶17

( 2025:JHHC:18573 )

¶18

in commission of the crime and as per Paragraph No. 46 of the Case Diary, motorcycle belongs to the petitioner.

¶19

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner as this case needs proper investigation in presence of the petitioner including putting the petitioner on TIP also.

¶20

7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is

dismissed .

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Aditi

Suraj Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Koushik Das Allias Kaushik Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jithu Kisku Alias Jethu Kisku Vs the State of Jharkhand

Karuna Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Das Alias Sanjay Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Angani Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahendra Rai Alias Mahendra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand