Jharkhand High Court
Cr.A(SJ)/973/2026 of PINTU YADAV @ PINTU KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.973 of 2026 ---- 1. Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar, aged about 21 years, S/o Sital Yadav 2. Banti Yadav @ Banti Kumar, aged about 18 years, S/o Shankar Yadav 3. Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Ajay Yadav, aged about 21 years, S/o Bijay Yadav
2026:JHHC:29646
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.973 of 2026
----
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar, aged about 21 years, S/o Sital Yadav
2. Banti Yadav @ Banti Kumar, aged about 18 years, S/o Shankar Yadav
3. Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Ajay Yadav, aged about 21 years, S/o Bijay Yadav
4. Pravesh Kumar Yadav @ Pravesh Kumar @ Kora Yadav, aged about 26 years, S/o Krishna Nandan Prasad Yadav
5. Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar, aged about 23 years, S/o Tulsi Yadav
6. Ajay Kumar Yadav, aged about 18 years, S/o Shankar Yadav
7. Dilip Kumar Yadav, aged about 23 years, S/o Maho Yadav All are R/o Karkend Khatal, P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Putki, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand
…. …. Appellant(s) -Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Ravi Pasi, S/o Badri Pasi, Resident of Village Pasi Dhaura, P.O. Karkend, P.S. Putki, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand) …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ----
For the Appellants
: Mr. Raj Nandan Chatterjee, Adv.
For the State
: Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P.
----
02/Dated: 05th October, 2026
1. The present criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 31.07.2026 passed by the court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST, Dhanbad in A.B.P No.1346 of 2026 whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants has been rejected in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.01 of 2026, for the offence under Sections 109(2), 118(1), 118(2), 352, 351(3), 127(2) & 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r)& 3(1)(s) of the SC/ ST (POA) Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge SC/ST (PoA) Act, Dhanbad.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that specific allegation under the SC/ST (PoA) Act has not been applied by the police, and as such, he has instructions from their clients not to pursue in the present criminal appeal. Accordingly, permission has been sought for withdrawal of the same.
3. Learned counsel for the State has no objection.
4. Permission is granted. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal is, hereby, dismissed as withdrawn.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 05th October, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded on 06.10.2026
Page No.2 Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.973 of 2026