Vikash Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2022 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Vikash Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 March, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                  [2026:JHHC:7213]


      IN     THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           A.B.A. No. 1093 of 2026
      1. Vikash Kumar Singh, Aged about 50 years, Son of
      Braj Nandan Singh,
      2. Pratima Singh, Aged about 42 years, D/o-
      Parmeshwar Singh,
      3. Deepshikha Roy @ Dipshikha Roy, Aged about 26
      years, D/o- Vijay Kumar,
           All Resident of Village- Shiv Mandir, Lowadih
      Chowk, Namkum, PO+PS- Namkum, District- Ranchi.
                                                  .....   ...     Petitioners
                                 Versus
      The State of Jharkhand
                                                  .....   ...     Opposite Party
                             --------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Avishek Prasad, Advocate.

      For the State          :        Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.
                             ------

04/ 17.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P

for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection

with Dhurwa (Hatia) P.S. Case No. 321 of 2025, registered for the

offence under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 337, 338, 336(3) and 61 of

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners are the purchasers of the land of a portion of Plot No.

890. He next submits that the petitioners have already paid the

consideration amount of Rs. 31,93,400/- and further rupees two lakhs

as stamp duty and thereafter the registration has been made in favour of

the petitioners. He further submits that although the petitioners have

purchased the land, however, till date, they have not been provided the

possession of said land and they have been implicated in the present

case. He also submits that one title suit, being Original Title Suit No.

[2026:JHHC:7213]

793 of 2025 has been instituted by Lal Madhusudan Nath Shahdeo, Lal

Sachindra Nath Shahdeo, Ranju Devi, Lal Abhishek Nath Shahdeo and

Lal Ranjan Nath Shahdeo against Sushila Shahdeo, who happened to

be the legal heir and successor of Lal Mahindra Nath Shahdeo and the

informant of the present case is not the party in the said suit.

4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the

prayer and submits that by way of manipulating the genealogical table,

the land has been purchased in connivance with the power of attorney

holder.

5. Considering that the petitioners have already paid the

consideration amount of Rs. 31,93,400/- and further rupees two lakhs

as stamp duty and thereafter the land has been registered in the name of

the petitioners by way of registered sale deed, which is the part of the

FIR itself and further for the land in question one title suit, being

Original Title Suit No. 793 of 2025 has already been instituted, in

which, the informant of the present case is not a party and in that view

of the matter, the petitioners, named above, are directed to surrender

before the learned Court within two weeks from today and the learned

Court shall release the petitioners on such terms and conditions or the

sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-17.03.2026 Amitesh/-