Lokesh Kumar Srivastava @ Lokesh Kumar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1847 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Lokesh Kumar Srivastava @ Lokesh Kumar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 12 March, 2026

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                 ( 2026:JHHC:6477 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
              B.A. No. 1666 of 2026
                       ------

Lokesh Kumar Srivastava @ Lokesh Kumar Srivastav, aged about 35 years, son of late Lowin Prasad, resident of M.S. Residency, Flat No. D/2, C.M.P.F. Co-Operative Colony, Near Bhuiphore Mandir, P.O.-K.G. Ashram, P.S.-Saraidhela, Dist.-

     Dhanbad (Jharkhand)                ...           Petitioner
                               Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                  ...           Opposite Party
                                    ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kundan Kr. Ambastha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishwambhar Shastri, Addl. P.P.

------

Order No.02 Dated- 12.03.2026

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.97 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 406/409/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the former business correspondent of the informant bank and in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons, he has cheated the bank and misappropriated the money from the bank by making the bank release loans to different persons on the basis of pledge of spurious and fake golds. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and it is not the duty of the petitioner to verify the genuineness of the gold pledged by the borrower. It is next submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of himself taking any loan. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been submitted in this case and no witness has been examined in this case till date. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.10.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 10 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Dhanbad, in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.97 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 12.03.2026 Gunjan-