Jharkhand High Court
A.B.A./5413/2026 of DILIP KISPOTTA @ DILEEP KISPHOTTA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 28 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5413 of 2026 ------ Dilip Kispotta @ Dileep Kisphotta, aged about 32 years, s/o Paskal Kispotta, R/o Village-Adarshnagar, P.O.+P.S.- Mahuadanr, Dist.-Latehar, State-Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …
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:29146 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5413 of 2026
------ Dilip Kispotta @ Dileep Kisphotta, aged about 32 years, s/o Paskal Kispotta, R/o Village-Adarshnagar, P.O.+P.S.- Mahuadanr, Dist.-Latehar, State-Jharkhand
… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Uttam Kr. Das, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 28.09.2026
Heard the parties.
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mahuadanr P.S. Case No.31 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/351(2)/352 of the B.N.S., 2023.
The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner voluntarily caused hurt by dangerous weapons to the victim. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and drawing attention of this Court to the rejection order of the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner dated 13.08.2026 in A.B.P. No. 306 of 2026 at internal page no. 4, it is submitted that the injury report of the victim shows that the alleged injury sustained by the victim is simple in nature so, the offence punishable under Section 118(2) of B.N.S. is not made out and other offences are bailable in nature. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 11 of the anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, he shall 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 S.D.J.M., Latehar, in connection with Mahuadanr P.S. Case No.31 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him 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 pendency of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
28.09.2026 Gunjan-