Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjeet Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand ….. … … on 13 April, 2026

    0
    36
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Jharkhand High Court

    Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjeet Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand ….. … … on 13 April, 2026

    Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

    Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                           ( 2026:JHHC:10523 ) )
    
    
    
    
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   A. B. A. No. 1546 of 2026
    
              1. Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjeet Kumar, aged about 30 years, son of Mahesh
                   Yadav, resident of At Kusvatad, P.O. Kaura, P.S. Pratappur, District-
                   Chatra, State-Jharkhand
              2. Satendra Singh @ Satendra Ganjhu, aged about 42 years, son of
                   Jaglal Ganjhu, resident of village Eghara Falenda, P.O. Kaura, P.S.
                   Pratappur, District-Chatra, State-Jharkhand
                                                      ...... ...     Petitioners
                                    Versus
    The State of Jharkhand                                  .....    ...      Opposite Party
                                --------
    

    CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
    For the Petitioners :Mr. Raj Nandan Chatterjee, Advocate
    For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmain, Spl.P.P

    02/ 13.04.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

    SPONSORED

    counsel for the State.

    2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with

    Manatu P.S. Case No. 27/2025, N.D.P.S. No. 21/2025 registered under

    sections 18, 29, of N.D.P.S. Act and section 33 of Indian Forest Act,

    pending in the Court of learned Special Judge under NDPS Act, Palamau.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false allegation

    is made of cultivation of poppy plant in the forest area. He next submits that

    the said land is not belonging to the petitioners and petitioners have got no

    criminal antecedent which is disclosed in para 21 of the petition. On these

    grounds, he submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege of

    anticipatory bail.

    4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits

    that allegations are there of cultivation of poppy plant in the forest area.

    5. Considering that land is of the forest department and petitioners

    have got no criminal antecedent which is disclosed in para 21 of the petition

    and in that view of the matter, the petitioners are directed to surrender

    before the learned court within two weeks from today and the learned court

    shall release the petitioners on terms and conditions and sureties as learned
    ( 2026:JHHC:10523 ) )

    court deems fit and proper.

    6. This anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

    Dt.13.04.2026                                    ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
    satyarthi-
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here