Vikash Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Vikash Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail effectively granted: petitioners directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks, and on surrender to be released on bail on such terms and conditions or sureties as the learned Court deems fit and proper.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the three petitioners who are apprehending arrest in connection with Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025 (offences under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 337, 338, 336(3) and 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

Court's answer

In considering the anticipatory bail prayer, the Court took into account that the petitioners had already paid the consideration amount of Rs. 31,93,400/- and further rupees two lakhs as stamp duty, and that the land had been registered in their name by registered sale deed (which forms part of the FIR); additionally, Original Title Suit No. 793 of 2025 concerning the land had already been instituted, in which the informant of the present case is not a party.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within two weeks from the date of the decision.

Key takeaways

Upon surrender, the learned Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper, i.e., bail is granted following surrender.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory Bail - bail on surrender directed. A.B.A. No. 1093 of 2026 (High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.; decided 17.03.2026): Three petitioners apprehending arrest in Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025 (Sections 318(4), 316(2), 337, 338, 336(3) and 61, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; pending before CJM, Ranchi) applied for anticipatory bail. Counsel submitted that the petitioners were purchasers of a portion of Plot No. 890, had paid Rs. 31,93,400/- as consideration plus rupees two lakhs as stamp duty, were registered owners by registered sale deed (part of the FIR), yet had not been given possession and had been implicated; Original Title Suit No. 793 of 2025 instituted by Lal Madhusudan Nath Shahdeo, Lal Sachindra Nath Shahdeo, Ranju Devi, Lal Abhishek Nath Shahdeo and Lal Ranjan Nath Shahdeo against Sushila Shahdeo (legal heir/successor of Lal Mahindra Nath Shahdeo) did not include the informant as a party. The State (A.P.P. Mrs. Ruby Pandey) opposed, submitting that the land was purchased by manipulating the genealogical table in connivance with the power of attorney holder. Considering the payments made, the registration of the land in the petitioners' names and the pending title suit excluding the informant, the Court directed the petitioners to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and ordered that they be released on such terms and conditions or sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

[2026:JHHC:7213]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A. No. 1093 of 2026

Vikash Kumar Singh, Aged about 50 years, Son of Braj Nandan Singh,

Pratima Singh, Aged about 42 years, D/oParmeshwar Singh,

Deepshikha Roy @ Dipshikha Roy, Aged about 26 years, D/o- Vijay Kumar,

All Resident of Village- Shiv Mandir, Lowadih

Chowk, Namkum, PO+PS- Namkum, District- Ranchi.

The State of Jharkhand

..... … Petitioners Versus ..... … Opposite Party --------

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----For the Petitioners : Mr. Avishek Prasad, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. ------

04/ 17.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P

for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 337, 338, 336(3) and 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the purchasers of the land of a portion of Plot No. 890. He next submits that the petitioners have already paid the consideration amount of Rs. 31,93,400/- and further rupees two lakhs as stamp duty and thereafter the registration has been made in favour of the petitioners. He further submits that although the petitioners have purchased the land, however, till date, they have not been provided the possession of said land and they have been implicated in the present case. He also submits that one title suit, being Original Title Suit No.

-1-

[2026:JHHC:7213]

793 of 2025 has been instituted by Lal Madhusudan Nath Shahdeo, Lal Sachindra Nath Shahdeo, Ranju Devi, Lal Abhishek Nath Shahdeo and Lal Ranjan Nath Shahdeo against Sushila Shahdeo, who happened to be the legal heir and successor of Lal Mahindra Nath Shahdeo and the informant of the present case is not the party in the said suit.

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that by way of manipulating the genealogical table, the land has been purchased in connivance with the power of attorney holder.

Considering that the petitioners have already paid the consideration amount of Rs. 31,93,400/- and further rupees two lakhs as stamp duty and thereafter the land has been registered in the name of the petitioners by way of registered sale deed, which is the part of the FIR itself and further for the land in question one title suit, being Original Title Suit No. 793 of 2025 has already been instituted, in which, the informant of the present case is not a party and in that view of the matter, the petitioners, named above, are directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today and the learned Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Dated:-17.03.2026 Amitesh/-

-2-