Abhishek Anand Vs the State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:3599

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 496 of 2025

Abhishek Anand, aged about 34 years, son of Sri Dhananjay Shukla, resident of village-Khairant, P.O-Guruwa, P.S. Lesliganj, Dist-Palamu …… Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1.The State of Jharkhand

¶7

2.Deepika Devi, wife of Late Bablu Prasad Paswan, resident of Sail Refectry Colony, Ranchi Road, Sadar, P.O & P.S-Mandu ……… (Kujju) Dist-Ramgarh Respondents

¶8

---------

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶10

---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, APP For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Amritansh Vats, Advocate : Mr. Arpan Manjesh Ekka, Advocate

¶11

-----------

¶12

Delivered on:10.02.2026 CAV on:19^th January, 2026

¶13

This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mandu P.S. Case No.59 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 3(5) of BNS Act and Section 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, FTC at Ramgarh.

¶14

As per FIR, it is alleged by the informant that from her bank account No. 497810110014152 of Bank of India, an amount of Rs.11,61,253 (Eleven Lacs Sixty one thousand two hundred fifty three rupees) and from other account of State Bank of India being Account No. 39088473319 an amount of Rs.10,79,742/-(Ten Lacs seventy nine thousand seven hundred forty two rupees) through the cheque book, ATM Card and net banking have been fraudulently misappropriated by Abhishek Anand (appellant) in the years 2019-2020. The Aadhar Card of appellant is 558626512086 and PAN is BTYРА 5187Q son of

¶15

1

¶16

2026:JHHC:3599

¶17

Sri Dhananjay Shukla who stays behind Ramgarh College at Shivpuri Colony.

¶18

She also stated that appellant was a Tuition Master who used to give tuition to her son Adittya Kumar and daughter Varsha Kumari in the year 2018 at her home. Abhishek had also told her that he had been an Officer in the crime branch and had to leave the job for certain reasons. During that period, the husband of the informant, who had been working as a driver in the Sail Refractory unit Ranchi Road, as a driver, become seriously ill and passed away on 24 September 2019. After his death, she received an amount of Rs.21,32,247/- as EPF and deposited the same in her account in the Bank of India and gratuity amount in the state Bank of India in the year 2020. On 14th September 2020 when she came then the appellant Abhishek Anand told her to deposit the amount in the SBI Mutual Fund and also make insurance in the name of her daughter Varsha Kumari so that she would receive a handsome amount in the year 2024. Further in the year 2019, Abhishek Anand had got her signature on some papers and also withdrew cash from her account and also told her that her work had been done.

¶19

However, in the year 2024 when the informant went to the Bank for withdrawing her money for marriage of her daughter, then she was informed that there was no money in her bank account. On enquiry she came to know that Sri Abishek Anand had withdrawn the entire amount and had concealed the entries made in the SBI pass book and pass book of Bank of India so that she would not be able to understand. Then she called Abhishek Anand on 28th November 2024 to her house to talk with him and he said that he had withdrawn the entire money and he had spent the entire money on his education, in education

¶20

2

¶21

2026:JHHC:3599

¶22

of his brother Atul, Gaurav and Rahul and in other works. Sri Abhishek Anand also confessed that he had withdrawn the entire amount and also signed an agreement stating therein that he had withdrawn the entire amount whose value presently was Rs.28,14,813/-(Twenty-eight lacs Fourteen Thousand Eight hundred thirteen rupees) which would be returned prior 12 hours of 31.12.2024. But till today he had not returned the same and has also absconded and has also switched off his mobile. Thereafter, it is alleged that she sent her son in the year 2024 to his residence for talking whereupon his father Dhananjay Shukla, his brother Atul and friend of Atul namely, Vivek Kumar Upadhayay, who is also a witness of the agreement along with them abused in filthy languages and used derogatory words in relation to caste and started assaulting him. However, the son of the informant ran away saving his life and the present FIR was lodged.

¶23

Heard Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, learned APP for the State and Mr. Amritansh Vats, learned counsel for the Informant.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that save and except the allegation levelled in the last five lines of the FIR, the informant sent her son to talk with Abhishek at his Ramgarh residence when the present appellant has abused him in filthy languages and made some remarks with regard to how they have come into possession of such a huge amount and therefore, the appellant cannot be brought within the provisions of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. It is submitted that there is no allegation in the entire FIR to even remotely connect the appellant of having committed any offence under any sections of

¶25

3

¶26

2026:JHHC:3599

¶27

the BNS Act. It is submitted that in the FIR itself the informant has admitted that from the year 2018 the appellant had been imparting tuitions to her son and daughter namely, Aditya Kumar and Varsha Kumari at home. It is also admitted in the FIR that when her husband developed serious diseases and while working in the post of a Driver suddenly passed away on 24.09.2019 and when the entire post benefit of her husband was transferred to her Bank Account on 13.12.2019 to the tune of Rs.21,32,247 (Twenty One lacs Thirty Two Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven) and gratuity amount transferred to her SBI Account. It is submitted that the appellant only took an amount of Rs.5,85,150/- as his tuition fees for the period he had imparted tuition to the son and daughter of the informant and it is very wrong for the informant to state that when she went withdrawing her amount in the year 2024, she came to know that the entire amount had been withdrawn by the present appellant. It is submitted that no amount other than his tuition fees had been received by him from the post-retirement amount of the lady.

¶28

It is submitted that the petitioner was forcefully confined in a room of their house on 28.11.2024 and was forced to draft an agreement in their dictated term and finally was forced to put his signature. The revenue statement was also affixed where the petitioner was forced to make his signature.

¶29

It is submitted that on 10.09.2020 an amount of Rs.3.00 Lakhs, Rs.7.00 Lakhs was deposited on 14.09.2020 then further amount of Rs.7.00 Lakhs, Rs.6,69,214 has been credited and at best the informant got deposited approx Rs.24 Lakhs in the Bank Account of Abhishek Anand is an error on the fact of record.

¶30

4

¶31

2026:JHHC:3599

¶32

It is submitted that the informant in para-4 of the Case Diary is completely wrong and false and the petitioner had charged about 6 to 8 lakh which was paid to him by her own signature, consent and knowledge as tuition fee from the year 2018 till the year 2024 as the petitioner had been rendering tuition to both her children only with a view to help them in time of need.

¶33

It is submitted that the daughter of the informant namely, Varsha Kumari was the student of MBA course at Shanti Business School at Ahmedabad where the petitioner had been working and for the period of Academic Session 2021 till 2023 the entire expenses of the daughter of the informant were borne by the appellant total amounting to Rs.4 to 5 Lakhs.

¶34

It is submitted that the appellant has not taken any amount except Rs.6 Lakhs. It is submitted that the assertions made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent No.2 is not correct and Bank statements enclosed as Annexure-A to Annexure-F and Annexure-G cannot be relied upon and hence he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the appellant along with family members has cheated more than Rs.45 Lakhs from the informant and the appellant had withdrawn Rs.3.00 Lakhs, Rs.7.00 Lakhs, Rs.7.00 Lakhs, Rs.7,69,214/- approx Rs.24 Lakhs from the Bank Account of the informant in his own Bann Account and which has also come in the case diary at para-4, 12, 25, 27, 34 and 38. It is submitted that the informant is a widow lady and the appellant has cheated her in the garb of providing monetary benefit by investing in Mutual Fund etc. and taken her signature on various papers and also taken her Bank Account passbook by inducing her and the appellant is benefitted from

¶35

5

¶36

2026:JHHC:3599

¶37

the amount of the informant and hence prayer for anticipatory bail may be rejected.

¶38

Learned counsel for the informant, after adopting the submission of the learned APP, has further submitted that informant is a widow lady and the appellant induced her and taken her into faith and got her signatures, Bank Account and Cheque Book. It is submitted that the informant had received Rs.21,32,247/- towards EPF amount on account of death of her husband who was working in SAIL Refractory Unit and had died in the year 2019. She had also obtained certain amount towards State Bank Account. However, the appellant had withdrawn Rs.11,61,253/ from her Bank of India Account number and Rs.10,79,782 from the account of State Bank of India. It is submitted that appellant had also executed an agreement with the informant on 28.11.2024 with other coaccused persons as a witness wherein it was specially agreed that entire amount of Rs.28,14,813/ will be paid to the Respondent No.2-informant and the said amount was taken by the appellant on the false pretext of Lucrative Investment Returns. The photo copy of agreement has been enclosed as Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. 9. It is further submitted that on 10.09.2020, the appellant caused amounts of Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.7,00,000/ to be transferred from the Bank of India Account of Respondent No.2 (Account No.497810110014152) to State Bank of India Account (Account No.33088473319) through cheques. Upon dishonor of one such cheque, an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- was once again transferred by cheque on 14.09.2020 and on the same date a sum of Rs.6,69,214/- was credited as Gratuity amount from Steel Authority of India into the said account and Bank Account has been enclosed as Annexure-A series. It is submitted that the

¶39

6

¶40

2026:JHHC:3599

¶41

appellant has deliberately omitted reference to substantial withdrawals made by him, which include: Rs.2,00,000/- on 20.12.2019; Rs.25,000/- on 23.12.2019; Rs.2,50,000/- on 19.02.2020; Rs.3,00,000/- on 29.09.2020; Rs.1,50,000/- on 29.10.2020; Rs.1,50,000/ on 05.01.2021; and Rs.1,40,000/- on 27.01.2022 amount other transactions.

¶42

It is submitted that the daughter of Respondent No.2Varsha Kumari, who was enrolled in the PGDM course for the Academic Session 2021-2023 at Shanti Business School, had all her educational expenses fully covered through an education loan availed from the State Bank of India (Loan Account No.40456083355). This statement stands duly corroborated by the loan agreement documents and the payment receipts submitted to the said institution. It is submitted that the appellant had fraudulently effected unauthorized withdrawals aggregating Rs.14,53,834/ from Respondent No.2’s Bank of India Account; Rs.11,96,063/- from the State Bank of India Account; Rs.12,21,848/- from the account of Respondent No.2’s daughter, Varsha Kumari; and Rs.6,74,000/- from the account of Respondent No.2’s son, Aditya Kumar through cheques, ATM withdrawals and UPI transactions. The cash withdrawn was deposited by the appellant into his joint bank account with the appellant’s father, Dhananjay Shukla, as conclusively verified by reconciling the respective bank statements of Respondent No.2 and her children with the appellant’s joint account statements. Supporting working Excel sheets and an email from Varsha Kumari to the appellant and the said Bank statements have been enclosed as Annexure-E series.

¶43

It is submitted that the appellant has committed fraud in the Bank Account of the informant and which is evident from the Mutual Fund Account statement of the Respondent

¶44

7

¶45

2026:JHHC:3599

¶46

No.2 in which the appellant’s email ID ([email protected]) is registered.

¶47

It is further pointed out by the learned counsel for the informant that page 71, 78 and 82 which are the Bank statements of the Respondent No.2 enclosed in Annexure-A series, will reveal that an amount of Rs.4,20,000/ was transferred to Mr. Aditya Kumar (brother of the appellant), Rs.3,75,000/- was transferred from Bank Account of her daughter Varsha Kumari to the Bank Account of the appellant Abhishek Anand and Rs.2,87,000/- was transferred from the Bank Account of Varsha Kumari (daughter of the informant) to the Bank Account of the appellant. Even Annexure-B which is statement of Bank Account of the informant, would reveal that Rs.2,50,000/- was withdrawn as cash amount on 18.02.2020 by the appellant and which was deposited in his Bank Account on 18.02.2020 by different denominations i.e. Rs.49,500/-, Rs.51,000, Rs.50,000/Rs.50,000/- and Rs.47,500/- respectively.

¶48

It is further submitted that for the convenience the informant has produced the chart of different transactions as Annexure-E series which starts from Page-109 to 113 showing transactions from the Bank Account of the informant to appellant and transactions from the Bank Account of Varsha Kumari is enclosed at page 114 through UPI and cheques. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.4,30,000/- has been transferred to brother of the appellant on 08.03.2024, 09,03.2024, 12.03.2024, 03.01.2023 and 22.02.2023 and page 118, 119, 120, 121 contain the transfer amount, total Rs.11,41,250/ from the bank Account of the Informant Deepika Devi and Rs.12,21,848/ from the Bank Account of Varsha Kumar (daughter of the informant) in the joint Bank Account of Abhishek Anand (i.e. the appellant) and his father Dhananjay Shukla. Even a sum of

¶49

8

¶50

2026:JHHC:3599

¶51

Rs.6,71,550/- was received in the Joint Account of appellant Abhishek and his father from the Bank Account of Aditya Kumar (son of the informant). Thus, the appellant has complete committed fraud upon the informant and upon her family members by illegally withdrawing aforesaid amounts which was the hard earned money of the deceased husband of the informant, who was a driver in the SAIL Refractory unit at Ranchi and hence the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant may be rejected.

¶52

Perused the FIR, case diary and the records of this case and considered the submissions of both the sides.

¶53

It appears from the FIR that there is direct allegation against the appellant for cheating the informant and her family members to a sum of Rs.28,14,813/-.

¶54

It appears that the informant in his subsequent statement at para-4 of the case diary stated that apart from the amount of Rs.28,14,813/- from the Bank Account of the informant by the appellant, the appellant had also withdrawn Rs.4,74,000/ and Rs.2.00,000/ (Total Rs.6,74,000/-) from the Bank Account of her son Aditya Kumar and Rs.10,53,569/- from the Bank Account of her daughter Varsha Kumari and thus, the informant had been cheated and the appellant had withdrawn Rs.45,42,382/- from the Bank Account of the informant, her son and her daughter and the same has not been returned.

¶55

It appears that Aditya Kumar, Pintu Kumar and Anand Kumar, whose statements are recorded at para-9, 10 and 11 of the case diary, that they have also supported the above fact in detail regarding receiving of Rs.28,14,813/ from the Bank Account of the informant, Rs.4,74,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- from the Bank Account of Aditya Kumar (son of the informant) and

¶56

9

¶57

2026:JHHC:3599

¶58

Rs.10,53,569/- from the Bank Account of Varsha Kumari (daughter of the informant).

¶59

Para-25 of the case diary reveals that during investigation, I.O had found that Rs.21,32,247/- was deposited in the Bank Account of India Account Number of the informant on 13.12.2019 and for which various transactions have been shown in the Bank Account of the appellant Abhishek and presently only Rs.66/- is shown in the Bank Account of the informant, which is maintained in the Bank of India, Marar, Kujju.

¶60

Para-27 further reveals that during investigation I.O has found deposit of Rs.6,69,214/- towards Gratuity in the State Bank Account number of the Informant on 14.09.2020 and in which various transactions has been shown in the name of appellant-Abhishek and only Rs.1727/- is left in the Bank Account of the Informant.

¶61

Similarly Para-34, 37 and 38 of the case diary reveal that transactions of Rs.4,74,000/-, Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.10,53,569/ from the bank Account of Aditya Kumar-son of the informant and Varsha Kumari-daughter of the informant on 20.03.2025 had been transferred to the bank account of the appellantAbhishek Anand.

¶62

From para-80, 81 and 82 contain the details of transactions made from the Bank Account of the informant Deepika Devi to the Bank Account of the appellant Abhishek Anand on different dates which was received by the I.O from Banker’s Book of Evidence Act under section 2 (A) which was certificate granted by the Bank. [Certificate under section 2 A of Banker’s Book of Evidence Act, 1891 which was received by the I.O from the designated official Branch Manager, State Bank of India on 03.05.2025 and 08.05.2025.]

¶63

10

¶64

2026:JHHC:3599

¶65

The conduct of the appellant clearly shows that he has completely cheated the informant and has committed fraud upon her by taking her money as well as money from the Account of her daughter and son to the extent of approx Rs.45 Lakhs as has been discussed above.

¶66

It also appears that the anticipatory bail application of two co-accused namely, Dhananjay Shukla and Atul Anand (i.e. father and brother of the appellant) has also been rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 in Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.435 of 2025.

¶67

Although learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant was not present on the date of alleged abused/hurled upon the son of the informant in his caste name and no case under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out, however, this Court is of the view that the appellant had preplanned and hatched conspiracy with his other family members for illegally withdrawing Rs.28,14,813/- from the Bank Account of the informant Deepika Devi and Rs.6,74,000/- from the Bank Account of her son Aditya Kumar and Rs.10,53,569/- i.e. total Rs.45,42,382/- from the Bank Account of her daughter Varsha Kumari by taking them into confidence. Hence the offence under the provisions of B.N.S is, prima facie made out against him.

¶68

Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant and hence the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant is rejected.

¶69

Thus, Cr. Appeal No.496 of 2025 is, hereby, dismissed.

¶70

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶71

Dated: 10.02.2026 Saket/-

¶72

11

Abhishek Anand v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Anand 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

Sachin Kumar Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Taushik Ansari MD Tusik Ansari Allias MD Tausik Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sandip Yadav Alias Sandeep Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mantu Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Debesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Himal Bauri Vs the State of Jharkhand