Allowed

Kanishka Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026A.B.A./5120/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in fogey due to lack of criminal antecedent and partial recovery of disputed amount, directing surrender within three weeks and cooperation in investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; directed to surrender within three weeks; enlarged on bail on furnishing Rs. 25,000 bond with two sureties and cooperating in investigation.

Kanishka Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27588

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5120 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Kanishka Sharma, aged about 35 years, son of Rajendra Sharma, Resident of F-22A, Azad Nagar, Bhilwara, P.O. and P.S. Bhilwara, District Bhilwara .... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

.... .... .... Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Special P.P.

¶10

------

¶11

02/14.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶12

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with B.S. City P.S. Case No. 85 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a resident of Rajasthan and he is in business of Crypto Currency. He submits that one Nakul has transferred Rs.1,90,000/- and out of the said amount, Rs.94,000/- is in dispute. He next submits that however, the said amount has already been hold by the Bank and subsequently, it has been transferred in the Account of the informant. He then submits that it has also come in the order of the learned Sessions Judge considering the paragraph nos.38, 39 and 84 of the case diary that amount hold from his Account was deducted from his Account and had been deposited in the Account of the Informant. He also submits that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and the he is cooperating in the investigation.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the amount has been credited in the Account of the petitioner and the petitioner is not cooperating in investigation.

¶15

In the order of the learned Sessions Judge, it has come that the said amount has already been credited in the Account of the informant in

¶16

2026:JHHC:27588

¶17

view of para 84 of the case diary and petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and the petitioner is a resident of Rajasthan, in the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro, in connection with B.S. City P.S. Case No. 85 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and further with the condition that on the date of surrender, he will also report to the concerned police station and cooperate in the investigation.

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

¶20

Dated 14.09.2026 Anit

¶21

Uploaded 16.09.2026

Kanishka Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanishka Sharma 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