Partly allowed

Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Sept 2026A.B.A./5122/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-bench order granting anticipatory bail to two female petitioners accused in a criminal case while rejecting it for two male petitioners due to allegations of intoxication and unspecific assault.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to female petitioners on surrender and furnishing bond conditions; bail rejected for male petitioners.

Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome Vs State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27604

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

A.B.A. No. 5122 of 2026

¶4

------

¶5

Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome, aged about 45 years, son of Durga Dom, Resident of Krishna Nagar, Railway Colony, P.O. Bokaro Steel City, P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro, Jharkhand

¶6

Lakhi Kalindi @ Lakhi Devi @ Lokhee Devi, aged about 36 years, wife of Dilip Kalindi, resident of Krishna Nagar, Railway Colony, P.O. Bokaro Steel City, P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro, Jharkhand

¶7

Ambuj Kumar @ Ambuj Kalindi, aged about 19 years, son of Dilip Kalindi, resident of Krishna Nagar, Railway Colony, P.O. Bokaro Steel City, P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro, Jharkhand

¶8

Lakhi Devi @ Lokkhi @ Lakkhi Kumari, aged about 18 years, daughter of Sanjay Kalindi, resident of Dumra, Baghmara, P.O. Nawagarh, P.S. Baghmara, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand

¶9

.... .... …. Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶13

For the Petitioners : Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.

¶14

------

¶15

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

¶16

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 351 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 127(1), 127(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109, 303(2), 324(4), 117(2) and 118(1) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that there are general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and even entire family members have been made accused. He submits that the lady members, who were not present on the spot, in spite of that they have been made accused. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioners.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that there are allegation against all the accused persons of assault and pursuant to that the informant has received grievous injury and wife of the informant has received simple injury and even the children have also

¶18

2026:JHHC:27604

¶19

received the injury and in view of that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners may kindly be rejected.

¶20

Looking to the contents of the FIR, it transpires that there are allegation of assault, it is not clear from whose assault, injury has been received, however, allegations are there that the altercation took place while they were indulge in gambling and have consuming intoxicating substance, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner nos.1 and 3. 6. Accordingly, prayer for bail of petitioner no.1- Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome and petitioner no.3- Ambuj Kumar @ Ambuj Kalindi, is hereby, rejected.

¶21

So far petitioner nos.2 and 4 are concerned, they are lady members of the family and there are general and omnibus allegation against them, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos.2 and 4.

¶22

Accordingly, the petitioner no.2- Lakhi Kalindi @ Lakhi Devi @ Lokhee Devi and petitioner no.4- Lakhi Devi @ Lokkhi @ Lakkhi Kumari are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro, in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 351 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶23

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

¶24

Dated 14.09.2026 Anit

¶25

Uploaded 16.09.2026

Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kalindi @ Dilip Dome v. 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