Chanda Bakhla vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party(S)
2025 Latest Caselaw 199 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Chanda Bakhla vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opp. Party(S) on 6 May, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                                                           2025:JHHC:13588

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                       A.B.A. No. 2549 of 2025

                       Chanda Bakhla, daughter of Siyon Bakhla, resident of near Mission School,
                       Birsanagar, P.O. Shahpur, P.S. Chainpur, District- Palamau, Jharkhand
                                                                                 ...... Petitioner(s).
                                                       Versus
                        The State of Jharkhand                                       ... Opp. Party(s).
                                                ------
                               CORAM       :    SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Kumar, Advocate.

                 For the State               :  Mr. Subodh Kr. Dubey, A.P.P.
                                                ........

03/06.05.2025:                This is an application filed by the petitioner praying for grant of

anticipatory bail in terms of Sections 482 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, as the petitioners have been allegedly implicated in a criminal case registered under Section(s) 420, 409, 476 and 467 IPC in connection with Daltonganj Sadar P.S. Case No. 02/2025, pending in the Court of learned CJM, Palamau at Daltonganj.

2. The allegation against this petitioner is that the petitioner has misappropriated Rs.3,74,954 from the college, where the petitioner was working. It is also alleged that she had taken away the account register and other registers.

3. During course of arguments, it has been submitted that prior to this case, this petitioner lodged a case against the informant alleging therein that she was sexually harassed. It has further submitted that during investigation of this case, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and has also handed over all the documents, pen drive and other materials. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has complied the notice issued under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.

4. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail but admits that notice was served to the petitioner and the petitioner had appeared.

5. The fact that the petitioner has appeared before the I.O and is cooperating with the investigation, suggests that it is not necessary to arrest the petitioner now.

6. Thus the petitioner should appear before the court concerned by filing appropriate application, which should be considered in terms of judgment 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.

7. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

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