Dismissed¶16

Rakesh Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Anticipatory bail – Second application

Jharkhand HC18 Apr 2026A.B.A./1768/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ABA 1768/2026, Jharkhand High Court Ranchi, Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, decided 18.04.2026; second anticipatory bail rejected for want of fresh ground after withdrawal of A.B.A. No. 3614 of 2025 on 08.07.2025; FIR Bashishtha Nagar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2024, IPC 120B conspiracy with NDPS Act sections 15, 18, 21, 25, 27(a), 29, 30; trial pending before Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra; petitioner Rakesh Kumar Yadav; State opposed; no cases cited; no quantum.

What did the court decide?

Since no fresh ground was argued in course of argument and the petitioner had earlier withdrawn his anticipatory bail application (A.B.A. No. 3614 of 2025), the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. ¶15

Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:11224

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1768 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Rakesh Kumar Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar, son of Mahendra Yadav @ Mahindra Yadav, resident of Village Tanku Karailibar Pindra, Hunterganj, P.O. Karailibar, P.S. Bashisthnagar, District Chatra

¶5

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Chandra S. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P.

¶9

------

¶10

02/18.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for

¶11

the State.

¶12

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bashishtha Nagar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2024, registered for the offence under Section 120B of the IPC, Section 15, 18, 21, 25, 27(a), 29 and 30 of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Chatra.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Court in A.B.A. No.3614 of 2025 which was dismissed as withdrawn. He submits that on the fresh ground, present second anticipatory bail application has been filed.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that there is no fresh ground stated in the petition, what has been stated in the petition, all those grounds were present when the petitioner has moved earlier anticipatory bail application.

¶15

In course of argument, no fresh ground has been argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the petitioner has earlier withdrawn the earlier anticipatory bail application being A.B.A. No.3614 of 2025 vide order dated 08.07.2025. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶16

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

¶17

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

¶18

Anit Uploaded 20.04.2026

Rakesh Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Vikash Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kudush Ansari Alias Tinku Allias MD Kudush Vs the State of Jharkhand

The Secretary M/S Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through Its Administrator Vs Munni Devi

Shubham Kumar Gupta Alias Shumbham Gupta Alias Tannu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunny Kumar @ Sandeep Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shiv Narayan Sah Vs State of Jharkhand