Ashok Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 3951 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ashok Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 June, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                                                                2025:JHHC:15743

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                      A.B.A. No. 6715 of 2024
                  Ashok Yadav, son of Dinesh Yadav, resident of Quarter No. 34, Sector 9/D,
                  Bokaro Steel City, P.O and P.S. And District- Bokaro, Jharkhand...... Petitioner(s).
                                                           Versus
               1. The State of Jharkhand
               2. Nemhanti Devi, wife of Vinod Tirky, resident of village Rampur, P.O and P.S.
                  Chainpur, District- Gumla, Jharkhand.                          ... Opp. Party(s).
                                                           ------
                         CORAM        :      SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate.

           For the State           : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, A.P.P.
           For the informant:         Mr. Amit Kumar Choubey, Advocate
                                             ........
05/16.06.2025:    This anticipatory bail application under Section(s) 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Section(s) 406, 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Heard the parties at length and had gone through the documents, annexed along with this application.

Opportunity was given to the State and the informant to oppose the bail, which the they availed and opposed.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C has been issued to the petitioner which he complied with by appearing before the Investigating Officer.

Counsel for the State also submits that the petitioner has already complied with the notice issued under Section 41A Cr.P.C.

Considering the fact that the maximum punishment which can be imposed is seven year or less and the petitioner has already complied with the notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C, I am of the opinion that there is no imminent threat of arrest of the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the Court concerned. The Court thereafter will take appropriate steps in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 as well as the observation made in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another reported in (2024) 9 SCC 198.

    Anu/-C.P.-3                                                                          (ANANDA SEN, J.)