[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Sundar Jha vs State Of Jharkhand Through Cid ....Opp. ... on 17 March, 2026
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
2026:JHHC:7167
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 11740 of 2025
---------
Sundar Jha, S/o Late beebachha Jha, aged about 60 years old, R/o near masjid, bhazur
P.O.& P.S.-Pandaul, District-madhubani, Bihar. ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand through CID ....Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate
For the Informant : Ms. Neha Agrawal, Advocate
Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the O.P.-State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
---------
07/Dated:-17.03.2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant bail application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of
regular bail for the offences registered under Sections 406, 409, 420, 34 of IPC in
connection with C.I.D. P.S. Case No. 51/2024.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely
been implicated in this case and he has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He
further submits that the petitioner is simply an employee of Sahara India Company and
after getting several promotions, lastly retired from the post of Senior Manager at Zonal
Office Kanpur and the said Zonal Office as under direct control/command of the company
and no payments (deposits/withdrawals) were made at the Zonal Office and that the
petitioner had no concern about the policy decisions taken by the company/Board of
Directors whatsoever. He further submits that the petitioner was never in any manner
entrusted with property or with any dominion over property in his capacity as an employee
in the way of business as a Banker whatsoever, hence it cannot be said that he has
committed any criminal breach of trust in respect of alleged property. Learned counsel
further submits that all the deposits and withdrawals happen through Sahara's BAAS
software which is directly managed and maintained by headquarter, Lucknow and the
petitioner have had no involvement in any deposits or withdrawals whatsoever and the
petitioner for no offence has been languishing in custody since 22.08.2025; as such, the
petitioner may be enlarged on bail. He submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by
every condition as imposed by this court.
4. Learned P.P. assisted by the learned counsel for the informant have strongly
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there are convincing evidence
against the petitioner regarding his involvement in the alleged offence.
5. On perusal of the record, it appears that the Hon'ble Apex Court has
already given direction regarding "Sahara-SEBI Refund Account" which reads as follows:
"(i) Out of the total amount of Rs. 24,979.67 Crores lying in the "Sahara-SEBI
Refund Account", Rs. 5000 Crores be transferred to the Central Registrar of Cooperative
Societies, who, in turn, shall disburse the same against the legitimate dues of the depositors
of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies, which shall be paid to the genuine
depositors in the most transparent manner and on proper identification and on submitting
2026:JHHC:7167
proof of their deposits and proof of their claims and to be deposited in their respective bank
accounts directly.
(ii) The disbursement shall be supervised and monitored by Justice R. Subhash
Reddy, Former Judge of this Court with the able assistance of Shri Gaurav Agarwal,
learned Advocate, who is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist Justice R. Subhash Reddy as
well as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies in disbursing the amount to the
genuine depositors of the Sahara Group of Cooperative Societies. The manner and
modalities for making the payment is to be worked out by the Central Registrar of
Cooperative Societies in consultation with Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of this
Court and Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned Advocate."
6. Having regard to the aforesaid direction passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court
regarding refund of money from "Sahara-SEBI Refund Account" and looking to the
allegation made against the petitioner coupled with the fact that since charge has already
been framed and the trial is going on; therefore, I am inclined to enlarge this petitioner on
bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned A.J.C. XVIII, Ranchi in connection with C.I.D. P.S. Case No.
51/2024.
7. However, the grant of bail is subject to following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the learned trial court
and if he wishes for release of the same, he shall make proper application
before the concerned court who shall decide the application for release of
passport on its own merit.
(ii) The petitioner will not tamper with any evidence and/or will not threaten
any of the witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Ld. A.J.C. XVIII, Ranchi on each
and every date unless exempted by the learned Trial court on being
satisfied with the causes shown by the petitioner in this regard.
8. It goes without saying that the findings recorded by this court are
tentative in nature and will not have any bearing on the merits of the case and the
learned Trial court would be free to decide the case on the basis of evidence adduced at
the trial, without in any manner being prejudiced by the findings given hereinabove.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
MARCH 17, 2026
vikas/-
uploaded
17.03.2026
