Allowed¶19

Vivek Panjiyara v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Apr 2026A.B.A./1081/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A.B.A. No. 1081 of 2026; Vivek Panjiyara v. The State of Jharkhand; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi; anticipatory bail granted; Rikhiya P.S. Case No. 159 of 2025; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 Sections 351(2), 352, 324(2), 109(1), 111(4), 3(5); Arms Act Section 27; name surfaced via confessional statement; not named in FIR; assault allegation against co-accused Kundan Yadav; parity with co-accused granted bail in A.B.A. No. 1026 of 2026; surrender within two weeks; Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Deoghar; decided 01.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail allowed: petitioner directed to surrender before the learned court below within two weeks and to be released on such terms, conditions and sureties as the learned court deems fit and proper. ¶19

Vivek Panjiyara Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2026:JHHC:9181]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1081 of 2026

¶3

Vivek Panjiyara, Aged about 19 years, Son of Umesh Mandal, resident of Vill Charki Pahadi, P.O. Deopur & P.S.- Jasidih Amarpur Jasidih, District- Deoghar.

¶4

..... … Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

..... … Opposite Party

¶7

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Kumar Rishab Anand, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Nawin Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

¶10

¶11

03/ 01.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P

¶12

for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rikhiya P.S. Case No. 159 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 351(2), 352, 324(2), 109(1), 111(4), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has come on the basis of confessional statement. He next submits that the allegation of assault is not against this petitioner and that allegation is there against Kundan Yadav. He further submits that in identical situation, the other co-accused has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 1026 of 2026 by this court.

¶15

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of confessional statement.

¶16

Considering that the name of the petitioner has come on the

¶17

-1-

¶18

[2026:JHHC:9181]

¶19

basis of confessional statement and the allegation of making assault is not against this petitioner and further in the identical situation, the other co-accused has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in the aforementioned A.B.A., in that view of the matter, the petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

¶20

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶21

Dated:-01.04.2026 Amitesh/-

¶22

-2-

Vivek Panjiyara v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Panjiyara v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Ranjan Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Avinash Chandra Pandey Alias Avinash Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mokhtar Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S.Girindra Hard Coke Enterpr Vs Central Coalfields Ltd. And Ors.

Sri Sai Coke Industries Vs Central Coalfields Ltd. And Ors.

Smt Asha Lata Prasad Vs Housing Board