Dismissed¶¶14

Alok Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC19 Feb 2026A.B.A./934/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A.B.A. No. 934 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, decided 19.02.2026 by Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J. Anticipatory bail application of Alok Kumar Bharti dismissed; petitioner apprehending arrest in Godda (Town) P.S. Case No. 228/2025 under BNS Sections 316(2)/318(4)/338/336(3)/340(2)/3(5); held to be accomplice of Rakesh Roushan in employment-fraud/duping case; confession in case diary para 2, witness support in paras 3, 6, 7; counsel: Ashish Kr. Thakur (petitioner), Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P. (State).

What did the court decide?

The petitioner appears to be an accomplice of Rakesh Roushan; Rakesh Roushan confessed his guilt (recorded in para 2 of the case diary) and witnesses in paras 3, 6 and 7 of the case diary supported the allegation of duping persons and taking money for providing employment. ¶¶10

Alok Kumar Bharti Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:JHHC:4908

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 934 of 2026

¶3

Alok Kumar Bharti, aged about 26 years, S/o Arvind Kumar Bhagat, Resident of Village- Bastrai, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. + P.S. – Basantrai, District- Godda. … Petitioner

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Kr. Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P. -----

¶6

02/19.02.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶7

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Godda (Town) P.S. Case No. 228/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/338/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of the BNS, pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the petitioner is also the victim of the circumstances. He then submits that the petitioner has also paid the amount for an employment. He next submits that the said company in which the money has been invested for providing employment was being run by Rakesh Roushan. On these grounds, he submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be allowed.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioner happened to be an accomplice of the said Rakesh Roushan and in view of that, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.

¶10

Rakesh Roushan has confessed his guilt and that has come in para 2 of the case diary and other witnesses vide paras 3, 6 and 7 of case diary have supported the allegation. The petitioner appears to be an accomplice

¶11

¶12

2026:JHHC:4908

¶13

of Rakesh Roushan and allegations are made of duping the persons and taking money for providing employment. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, as such, his prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected.

¶14

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands dismissed.

¶15

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶16

Dated: 19^th February, 2026 Vedanti/-

¶17

Alok Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar Bharti v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhu Narayan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand through Anti Corruption Bureau

Xxx Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raj Kumar Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munimakula Sumalatha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kapildev Ahir Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abhinay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand