Abutalha Alias Abutlaha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:20364 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 5984 of 2026 Abutalha @ Abutlaha ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Informant … Opposite Parties --CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioner : Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate Ms. Asfia Sultana, Advocate For the State : Mr. P. D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate --- Order No. 03 Dated 09^th July, 2026

¶4

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

¶5

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 129 of 2026 arising out of Chatra (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 404 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Chatra.

¶6

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected in B.A. No. 2246 of 20026 vide order dated 20.03.2026.

¶7

Renewing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, submission has been advanced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in habit of trapping innocent persons and thereafter blackmailing them. He has referred to a letter issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Chatra from which it transpires that the informant had trapped one Ajay Kumar and had extracted an amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs, but despite the same, she had further demanded an amount of Rs. 10 Lakhs at which the Sub Divisional Officer, Chatra had directed the Officer-In-Charge, Chatra P.S. to verify the said facts. Mr. Allam has also referred to the First Information Report in Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No. 249 of 2024 which was instituted by the informant against Md. Hasan and he has stated that after the greed of the informant was satisfied by way of monetary compensation, she did not support the case of the prosecution and ultimately the said Md. Hasan was acquitted by the learned trial court. Mr. Allam has therefore submitted that the informant is in the habit of filing false cases and the allegations in the earlier cases are similar to the present case which is with respect to establishing physical relationship with the informant

¶8

on the pretext of marriage. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2026.

¶9

Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has specifically referred to the compromise which has been arrived at between one Ajay Kumar with the present informant. While referring to the said compromise, learned counsel submits that the signature of the informant in the compromise deed is forged as the same does not match with the signature of the informant in the Vakalatnama filed in this case. Mr. Sarkhel has submitted that though a purported compromise was arrived at between the informant and one Ajay Kumar, but it seems that no case was instituted against the said Ajay Kumar. Learned counsel therefore submits that the said settlement appears to be a dubious document and has been forged only for the purposes of the present bail application.

¶10

Though it has been submitted by Mr. Allam referring to certain serious incidents in which the informant was at the receiving end and which according to him led the informant to blackmail the accused or whosoever who had taken advantage of her, but on perusal of the compromise it does appear that the difference in the signature of the informant in the said compromise as well as in the Vakalatnama is apparent even when seen through naked eye. Merely because the informant had earlier also instituted some cases, the same would not at the present instance dilute the allegation against the petitioner of establishing sexual relationship with the informant on the pretext of marriage.

¶11

In such circumstances, therefore, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner which stands rejected once again.

¶12

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

¶13

09.07.2026 MK

¶14

Page-2

Abutalha Alias Abutlaha v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abutalha Alias Abutlaha v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Kalim Ansari Vs Sabila Khatoon

Md. Aarif Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Satish Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Chandrashekhar Ojha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sohil Kumar Ray @ Karan Kumar Roy @ Sohil Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pritam Kumar Pathak Vs the State of Jharkhand