Jharkhand High Court
Cr.A(DB)/1018/2026 of SANJANA KUMARI ALIAS SANJANA KUMARI SINGH Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 21 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1018 of 2026 --- Sanjana Kumari @ Sanjana Kumari Singh --- Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Rai ---
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:28432-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1018 of 2026
--- Sanjana Kumari @ Sanjana Kumari Singh
--- Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand
--- --- Respondent --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Rai ---
For the Appellant : Mr. D.K. Malityar, Adv.
For the State
: A.P.P.
03/21.09.2026
Heard Mr. D.K. Malityar, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 22.07.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dhanbad in MCA Case No.1641 of 2026 arising out of Putki P.S. Case No.44 of 2026 whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
It has been alleged that the appellant was apprehended from Hatia Railway Station along with two minor children who were being trafficked to Rajasthan.
Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that in the 183 BNSS statement of the victims they had stated that since their parents did not allow them to go to Ranchi, they without any information to their family members, were going to Ranchi where they were apprehended by the Police at Hatia Railway Station. Learned counsel submits that the appellant is in custody since 08.05.2026 and she does not have any criminal antecedents.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
Regard being had to the 183 BNSS statement of the victims and the period of custody undergone by the appellant, we while setting aside the order dated 22.07.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dhanbad in MCA Case No.1641 of 2026 arising out of Putki P.S.
2
Case No.44 of 2026 direct that the appellant above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dhanbad in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.44 of 2026, subject to the condition that the appellant shall remain physically present before the learned trial court on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial, unless prevented by sufficient cause.
This appeal is allowed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Dated: 21st September 2026 Shamim/ Uploaded on: 24 /09/2026