Rejection of bail application by Shashi Kant accused of impersonation and cheating under BNNS 2023. Court declined bail citing serious allegations, criminal antecedents, and risk of absconding or tampering with evidence despite petitioner's defense.
Prayer for bail rejected. Petitioner remains in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
( 2026:JHHC:27844 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7356 of 2026
Shashi Kant, aged about 34 years, son of Mohan Lal @ Mohan Singh, resident of Village-Chhargaon, P.O. & P.S.-Refinery, Dist.-Mathura (U.P.) … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Avilash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.04 Dated- 15.09.2026
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No.260 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No. 398 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 316(2)/ 318(4)/ 61(2)/ 319(2)/ 336(3)/ 338/ 340(2)/ 3(5)/ 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail and earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.05.2026 in B.A. No. 3910 of 2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner impersonated himself to be a government servant and has cheated the informant by making him purchase two sim cards and duped the informant of Rs.3,00,000/- and also took a blank cheque by making the informant believe that the same will be used as a security for the payment of the salary of the informant and also furnished fake admit card; purportedly issued by the Agriculture Department and also conducted fake examination and further issued appointment letters and collected Rs. 26,23,200/-from the informant and the other victims. It is further alleged that the fake appointment letters which have purportedly been issued by Government of India Ministry of Agriculture Welfare, Department
of Agriculture, New Delhi for the posting of the informant and other victims in West Bengal and Bihar; when produced by the informant in the office of Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Siliguri, West Bengal to join there, he came to know that no such appointment letter has been issued in the name of the petitioner and they appointment letter handed over by the petitioner is completely fake. It is then alleged that the petitioner has also cheated several persons in this fashion. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that apart from this case, the petitioner is also involved in another case as has been mentioned in paragraph no.12 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.03.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct allegation against the petitioner as well as the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail.
Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and his criminal antecedent as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
15.09.2026
Gunjan-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to admit the petitioner on bail in a non-bailable offence involving impersonation and cheating given the chance of absconding and tampering with evidence.
Whether the petitioner's criminal antecedents justify rejection of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shashi Kant
The State of Jharkhand
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
