Jasimuddin Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2883 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Jasimuddin Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opposite ... on 9 April, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                                       2026:JHHC:10284




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                           A.B.A. No. 1483 of 2026
                                               ----

1. Jasimuddin Ansari, aged about 52 years, S/o Chhotu Miyan

2. Mujahid Ansari @ Md. Muzahid Alam, aged about 31 years

3. Jahid Ansari, aged about 29 years, both are s/o Jasimuddin Ansari All are R/o village - Surhi, Eidgah Mohalla, near Pani Tanki, PO

- Surhi, PS - Nawadih, District - Bokaro, Jharkhand .... Petitioners

-- Versus --

The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioners :- Md. Sajid Yunus, Advocate For the State :- Mrs. Bandana Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :- Mr. Sanket Ranjan, Advocate

----

02/09.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned

counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for

the Informant through V.C.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection

with Pirtand P.S. Case No.26 of 2025 for the alleged offences

registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61, 352 and 351(2) of

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned

C.J.M., Giridih.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the

petitioners have lodged the case under Section 138 of Negotiable

2026:JHHC:10284

Instruments Act against the informant and thereafter the present

case has been lodged. On this ground, he submits that anticipatory

bail may kindly be granted.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and learned

counsel appearing for the Informant through V.C. jointly opposed

the prayer and submits that the petitioner has a modus operandi of

cheating innocent persons by taking money and providing the

cheque and not to return the money and the petitioners are having

eight criminal antecedents of the same nature.

5. Considering that allegations are there against the

petitioners of misappropriating the amount of Rs.22,06,000/- by

way of duping and they used to take money and handover the

cheque, however, the cheques are not being honoured subsequently

and petitioner No.1 is having eight criminal antecedents and that

has come in the order of learned Sessions Judge.

6. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined

to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, hence, the

prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 09.04.2026 Sangam/