B.A./8986/2026 of SACHIDANAND KUMAR VERMA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, RANCHI on 24 September 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 8986 of 2026

Sachidanand Kumar Verma, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Mundrika Prasad, resident of Flat No. C208, Shree Sai Enclave, Harihar Singh Road, P.O Bariatu, P.S Bariatu, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

… … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand through Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ranchi

… … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate

: Mr. Ajay Kr. Sah, Advocate

For the Opp. Party : Ms. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.

---

04/24.09.2026

Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2026 in connection with A.C.B Ranchi P.S Case No. 13 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a)/ 7(A) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, now pending in the Court of Learned Special Judge, Anti- Corruption Bureau, Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner happens to be the Circle Officer and it is alleged that for the purposes of mutation and on the instruction of the petitioner, the informant was asked to meet the Revenue Karamchari - Rajesh Kumar. He further submits that during verification it has not come that the petitioner had instructed the informant of the case to give any bribe money.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter submits that the trap was laid and the bribe money has been recovered from the possession of the brother of the Revenue Karamchari. He has further submitted that the mutation application of the informant was rejected earlier way back on 02nd April, 2026 and the complaint was filed on 03.07.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that charge sheet has already been submitted.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- ACB has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that this was the modus operandi of the petitioner to take bribe money. She has submitted that there are numerous instances where the initial prayer for mutation was rejected and subsequently, on fresh application, the mutation was allowed. However, it is not in dispute that the bribe money has not been recovered from the possession of the petitioner or even from the possession of the Revenue Karamchari.

6. To this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that these are executive orders and there is no bar in entertaining repeated application for mutation and the mutation can be rejected on technical grounds for one or the other reason. He further submits that none of the persons whose mutation application was subsequently allowed have made any complaint against the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that even during verification it has not come that the petitioner had asked the informant to contact the Revenue Karamchari and give any amount of bribe.

8. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the bribe money is alleged to have been recovered from the brother of the Revenue Karamchari who is admittedly not a government servant and the charge sheet having been submitted, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the Learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ranchi in connection with A.C.B Ranchi P.S Case No. 13 of 2026, on the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.

(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.

(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.

(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court.

9. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

10. Let this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e- mail.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:24.09.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:28.09.2026