Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 3960 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 June, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                        2025:JHHC:15703


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         A.B.A. No.6717 of 2024
                                  ------
     Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Gupta, son of Shree Shiv
     Prasad Gupta, permanent resident of Sahpur, Saw Motor
     Garage, near Narendra Takies, PO and PS Aurangabad Town,
     District Aurangabad (Bihar) at present residing at Type 1/15,
     Income Tax Staff Colony, PO and PS Akurdi, District Pune (MH)
                                                ... ... Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus
     1.The State of Jharkhand.
     2.Supriya Kumari, wife of Chandan Kumar, D/o Shree
     Vidhyadhar Saw, resident of Shanti Nagar, Pokhariya, PO and
     PS Boriyo, District Sahebganj      ... ... Opposite Party(s)
                                  ------
                     CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S.Choudhary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P. For OP No. 2 : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate

-----

05/ 16.06.2025

Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of JMFC, Sahibganj in connection with Complaint Case No. 267 of 2023.

3. During course of argument, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this case arises out of complaint and after cognizance has been taken, the petitioner has approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail on receipt of summons.

4. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

5. Admittedly since the case arises out of a complaint and cognizance has already been taken thus this case will fall within the category-A of the situations categorized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Satender Kumar Antil vs.

2025:JHHC:15703 Central Bureau of Investigation and Another" reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court the following course of actions should be taken by the Court concerned in case of category-A offences:

"Category A After filing of charge-sheet/complaint taking of cognizance

(a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including permitting appearance through lawyer.

(b) If such an accused does not appear despite service of summons, then bailable warrant for physical appearance may be issued.

(c) NBW on failure to appear despite issuance of bailable warrant.

(d) NBW may be cancelled or converted into a bailable warrant/summons without insisting physical appearance of the accused, if such an application is moved on behalf of the accused before execution of the NBW on an undertaking of the accused to appear physically on the next date/s of hearing.

(e) Bail applications of such accused on appearance may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided."

6. Considering the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner should appear before the court concerned and file necessary bonds subject to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Tanuj/Cp-3