Saroj Devi Vs State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2026)

Saroj Devi Vs State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to petitioner nos. 1-3 (Saroj Devi, Sunita Kumari and Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Singh): they were directed to surrender within three weeks and, upon surrender/arrest, to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M. at Palamau, in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S, 2023.

Issue for consideration

Whether the three petitioners, who apprehend arrest in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026 (IPC ss. 406, 420, 384, 385, 304-A, 323, 353, 500, 504 and 120B), are entitled to anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Considering that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are nurses and petitioner no. 3 is driver in the Government Hospital, and the only allegation made is that the petitioners advised the informant to go to a private hospital, the judge was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the attending facts and circumstances.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of surrender/arrest, the petitioners are to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M. at Palamau, in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S, 2023.

Key takeaways

The petitioners were directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from the date of the order.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners (petitioner nos. 1 and 2 nurses and petitioner no. 3 driver in a Government Hospital) apprehending arrest in Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026 under sections 406, 420, 384, 385, 304-A, 323, 353, 500, 504 and 120B IPC 1860, pending before learned C.J.M., Palamau. Ground: the only allegation against them was that they had advised the informant to go to a private hospital (New Life Hospital, Panki) for the operation on the deceased, wife of the informant. Conditions: surrender within three weeks; release on bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M.; subject to conditions under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S, 2023.

 ( 2026:JHHC:21058 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A. B. A. No. 3868 of 2026

Saroj Devi, aged about 39 years, wife of Shailesh Singh, resident of Sarauna Singh, P.O. Tetarain, P.S. Panki, Tetrain, District-Palamau

Sunita Kumari, aged about 37 years, wife of Pankaj Kumar, resident of Dhub, P.O. Dhub, P.S. Panki, District-Palamau

Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Singh, aged about 39 years, son of Jhalu Mahto, resident of Dhub, P.O. and P.S. Panki, District-Palamau

...... … Petitioners

Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.

02/ 17.07.2026 : Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, registered under sections 406, 420, 384, 385, 304-A, 323, 353, 500, 504 and 120B of the I.P.C, 1860, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M at Palamau.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioners have nothing to do with the operation made upon the body of the deceased who happens to be wife of the informant. He further submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are nurses in the Government Hospital and petitioner no. 3 is driver in the said Government Hospital. He next submits that only allegation is made that petitioners have advised the informant to go to private hospital for operation and the operation was done in New Life Hospital, Panki. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there against the petitioners that they advised the

 ( 2026:JHHC:21058 )

informant to go to private hospital for operation.

Considering that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are nurses in the Government Hospital and petitioner no. 3 is driver in the said Government Hospital and only allegation is made that petitioners have advised the informant to go to private hospital and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M at Palamau, in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Dt.17.07.2026 satyarthi-