Jharkhand High Court
A.B.A./5550/2026 of SOHAN YADAV Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.5550 of 2026 ------ Sohan Yadav, aged about 32 years, son of Bigan Yadav, Resident of Milar, P.O. + P.S. – Manatu, District- Palamu, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM:
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.
[2026:JHHC:29742] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.5550 of 2026
------ Sohan Yadav, aged about 32 years, son of Bigan Yadav, Resident of Milar, P.O. + P.S. – Manatu, District- Palamu, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... .... Opposite Party
------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State
: Ms. Kumari Rashmi, Addl.P.P.
------ Order No:-02 Dated:-05-10-2026
Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.366 of 2021 instituted under Sections 33(1)(a), 41, 42 of the Indian Forest Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the tractor which was involved in transportation of 11 pieces of logs of woods from the protected forest area. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no knowledge about his tractor being involved in illegal activities. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-13 of the instant Anticipatory Bail Application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trail of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner also undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the complainant of the case or any of his family members in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within two weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.5,000/- as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chatra in connection with Complaint Case No.366 of 2021 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card before the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the complainant of the case or any of his family members in any manner during the trial of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:-05.10.2026 Saroj/