Ranjan Kumar Alias Ranjan Vs the State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:19445

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3562 of 2026

---- Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan, aged about 51 years, son of Late Kedar Nath Gupta, resident of village – Dibha Muhalla, PO and PS – Sadar Chatra, District – Chatra .... Petitioner

¶4

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

¶5

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶7

--For the Petitioner :- Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate :- Mr. Nilesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Achinto Sen, Advocate

¶8

¶9

02 /03.07.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶10

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No.165 of 2026, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2) and 117(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Chatra.

¶11

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case alleging that the petitioner being the teacher has scolded the daughter of the informant. He further submits that the husband of the informant is a contractor and doing work in MNREGA. He then submits that in the FIR the age of daughter is said to be minor studying in Class-V wherein by way of showing the name of the daughter in MNREGA scheme, where she is shown as major, father is withdrawing the amount and statement is made in paragraph No.20 of the petition. He next submits that only due to

¶12

--1-- A.B.A. No. 3562 of 2026

¶13

2026:JHHC:19445

¶14

village politics as the petitioner has objected the withdrawal of the money from the scheme in the name of the daughter, therefore, the petitioner has been implicated in this case.

¶15

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of scolding the daughter of the informant.

¶16

5. Considering that the statement made in paragraph No.20 it transpires that the father of the victim used to withdraw money by way of showing his daughter as a labourer and major from MNREGA scheme and the allegations are made in the FIR that the daughter is studying in Class-V and the petitioner has scolded her. The petitioner is said to be teacher and he has objected the withdrawal of the money from the scheme as argued by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

6. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Chatra in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No.165 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶18

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶19

Dated 03.07.2026 Sangam/

¶20

--2--

¶21

A.B.A. No. 3562 of 2026

Ranjan Kumar Alias Ranjan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Kumar Alias Ranjan 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Valmont Structures Private Ltd. Thro Its Authorized Signatory Namely Sachin Baburao Babar Vs Jahur Alias Jahur Khan

Prashant Garg Vs State of Jharkhand

Sunil Yadav Alias Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kamlesh Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arjun Kumar @ Arjun Oraon Vs State of Jharkhand

Lal Mohammad Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand