Sandip Kumar Pandey @ Pintu Pandey @ … vs The State Of Jharkhand …. Opposite … on 7 April, 2026

    0
    40
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Jharkhand High Court

    Sandip Kumar Pandey @ Pintu Pandey @ … vs The State Of Jharkhand …. Opposite … on 7 April, 2026

    Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

    Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                                                 2026:JHHC:9945
    
    
    
    
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                               A.B.A. No. 1345 of 2026
                                                   ----
    

    Sandip Kumar Pandey @ Pintu Pandey @ Sandeep Kumar
    Pandey, aged about 40 years, son of Ashok Kumar Pandey,
    resident of Khanudih, Baghmara, PO – Nadkhurki, PS –

                 Khanudih and District - Dhanbad                   .... Petitioner
                                            --       Versus        --
                 The State of Jharkhand                            .... Opposite Party
                                                   ----
    

    CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

    SPONSORED

    For the Petitioner :- Mrs. Shristi Sinha, Advocate
    :- Mr. Shashank Shekhar No.1, Advocate
    For the State :- Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate

    —-

    02/07.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well

    as the learned counsel appearing for the State.

    2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with

    Baghmara P.S. Case No.0065 of 2022 for the alleged offences

    registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307,

    353, 337, 338, 379, 427, 447, 504, 506 and 120B of Indian Penal

    Code, Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development &

    Regulation) Act, 1957, Rule 7/9/13 of Jharkhand Minerals

    (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017

    and Section 27 of Arms Act pending in the Court of learned Sub-

    Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

    3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

    there are allegations against 90 to 100 persons of entering into the

    –1– A.B.A. No. 1345 of 2026
    2026:JHHC:9945

    siding gate of Railway and they were trying to take coal. She further

    submits that in identical situation co-accused persons have already

    been granted anticipatory bail in ABA Nos.2657 of 2024, 2668 of

    2024, 6713 of 2023, 1165 of 2026 and 6751 of 2023.

    4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer

    and submits that allegations are there of forcefully entering into the

    siding gate of railway.

    5. Looking into the contents of the FIR it transpires that there

    are general and omnibus allegation against 90 to 100 persons of

    entering into the siding gate of railway and in identical situation co-

    accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail in the

    aforesaid ABAs and in that view of the matter the petitioner is

    directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks

    and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and

    conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and

    proper.

    (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
    Dated 07.04.2026
    Sangam/

    –2– A.B.A. No. 1345 of 2026



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here