Partly allowed

Bhanu Pratap Sahu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026A.B.A./5118/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of an anticipatory bail application. The application was dismissed as withdrawn for the second petitioner. For the first petitioner, the court directed anticipatory bail subject to surrender within three weeks and furnishing bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as withdrawn for petitioner no. 2. Anticipatory bail granted for petitioner no. 1 subject to surrender within three weeks and furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two suret

Bhanu Pratap Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27597

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

A. B. A. No. 5118 of 2026

¶4

Bhanu Pratap Sahu, aged about 32 years, son of Rajendra Prasad Sahu, resident of Hirodih, P.O. and P.S. Hirodih, DistrictGiridih

¶5

Vikash Kumar Choudhary @ Bikash Kumar Choudhary, aged about 34 years, son of Visheshwar Choudhary, resident of village-Ghouskodih, P.O. and P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih

¶6

...... … Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party

¶9

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, Spl. P.P.

¶11

02/ 14.09.2026 : Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶12

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 226 of 2025, registered under sections 281, 109, 132, 324 (5) of BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of learned J.M. Ist Class, Giridih.

¶13

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this anticipatory bail application on behalf of petitioner no.2 who is driver of Tata Hywa vehicle.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State has got no objection.

¶15

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn on behalf of petitioner no.2 namely, Vikash Kumar Choudhary @ Bikash Kumar Choudhary.

¶16

So far petitioner no.1 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner no.1 is the owner of the Tata Hywa vehicle having no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para 22 of the petition. He next submits that allegation of dashing the forest officials vehicle is against the petitioner no.2 who is driver of the said vehicle as the said vehicle was in the clutch of the petitioner no.2. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner no.1 may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶17

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that petitioner no.1 is owner of the vehicle in question and in view of that anticipatory bail of the petitioner no.1 may kindly be rejected.

¶18

( 2026:JHHC:27597

¶19

On perusal of F.I.R. it transpires that allegation of dashing the forest officials vehicle is against the petitioner no.2 who is driver and petitioner no.1 is owner of the vehicle in question having no criminal antecedent which is disclosed in para 22 of the petition.

¶20

In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1. Accordingly, the petitioner no.1 is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner no.1 shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.M. Ist Class, Giridih, in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 226 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023.

¶21

Dt. 14.09.2026 Satyarthi-

Bhanu Pratap Sahu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhanu Pratap Sahu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases