Vinay Kumar Choubey vs State Of Jharkhand on 31 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Supreme Court – Daily Orders

    Vinay Kumar Choubey vs State Of Jharkhand on 31 July, 2026

    Author: Aravind Kumar

    Bench: Aravind Kumar

                                                            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                                           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
    
                                                           Criminal Appeal            No.   3549/2026
    
                                                      (Arising out of SLP(Crl) No. 8589/2026)
    
    
    
                                        VINAY KUMAR CHOUBEY                                     Appellant(s)
    
    
                                                                           VERSUS
    
    
    
                                        STATE OF JHARKHAND                                      Respondent(s)
    
    
                                                                          O R D E R
    

    1. Heard.

    2. Leave granted.

    SPONSORED

    3. An FIR No. 11/2025 came to be registered for

    the offence(s) punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468,

    471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under

    Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of

    Corruption Act, 1988 against the appellant at Police Station

    ACB Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand on

    25.09.2025 in which appellant has been arraigned as an

    Signature Not Verified
    accused and he is seeking for grant of regular bail.
    Signature Not Verified

    Digitally signed by Digitally signed by

    Deepak Guglani           Deepak Guglani
    Date: 2026.08.06         Date: 2026.08.06
    
                                                                                 1
    13:46:15 IST             13:47:20 IST
    Reason:                  Reason:
    

    4. A complaint came to be submitted by Tripurari

    Singh (Journalist Secretary, Journalists Union, Kadma,

    Hazaribagh) alleging large scale illegal mutation of revenue

    records and encroachment of Bhudan land, Forest Land,

    Government Land, Grazing Land and Gair Majrua Aam and

    Gair Majrua Khas Lands by land mafias in Hazaribag

    District.

    5. A Preliminary Enquiry bearing No.24 of 2015

    was registered and clubbed with earlier enquiry for joint

    investigation. During the investigation irregularities were

    found in 33 mutation cases involving Gair Majrua Khas

    category land which the prosecution claims to be a forest

    land. The prosecution alleges that the concerned Revenue

    Officials in conspiracy with sellers and purchasers abused

    their official positions and illegally facilitated mutation of

    revenue records of forest land in violation of Indian Forest

    Act, 1927 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1890.

    6. Appellant came to be arrested on 11.11.2025

    and has remained in judicial custody from the said date on

    completion of the investigation chargesheet has been filed

    2
    on 05.02.2026 By the impugned Order the prayer for bail

    has been rejected.

    7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing

    for the parties, we have noticed that appellant assumed

    charge as Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh on

    26.05.2008 and worked till 05.10.2010. Between 2011 to

    2012, 23 mutations have been carried out particularly

    during the period 20.10.2011 to 21.03.2012.

    8. It is the case of the prosecution that while

    appellant was serving as Deputy Commissioner,

    Hazaribagh he had facilitated or influenced mutation of

    revenue records in favour of private person namely Vinay

    Kumar Choubey. Subsequently, this Court vide Order dated

    10.02.2026 granted interim bail to Vinay Kumar Choubey.

    Having regard to the fact that the investigation has been

    concluded and chargesheet has been filed and also the fact

    that co-accused has been granted bail, we are of the

    considered view that appellant is entitled for similar relief

    on the ground of parity.

    9. Hence, we allow this appeal, set aside the

    3
    impugned order and grant regular bail to the appellant,

    subject to such terms and conditions as the jurisdictional

    Court may impose.

    10. To allay the apprehension of the prosecution we

    grant liberty to the prosecution or to the complainant to

    seek for cancellation of the bail of the appellant, in the

    event of any of the conditions imposed being violated.

    Appellant shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all

    dates of hearing without fail except when specifically

    exempted by the jurisdictional Court trial Court.

    11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

    disposed of.

    …………………………………J
    (ARAVIND KUMAR)

    ……………………………………..J
    (VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)
    New Delhi;

    July 31, 2026
    
    
    
                                  4
    ITEM NO.6         COURT NO.12          SECTION II-A
    
                S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
    
              Criminal Appeal    No(s).   3549/2026
    
    VINAY KUMAR CHOUBEY                       Appellant(s)
    
                                VERSUS
    
    STATE OF JHARKHAND                       Respondent(s)
    
    
    

    IA No. 142472/2026 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF
    THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
    IA No. 142468/2026 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
    IA No. 142480/2026 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
    DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES

    Date : 31-07-2026 This matter was called on for
    hearing today.

    CORAM :

    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

    For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Adv.

    Mr. Amit Verma, AOR
    Ms. Anukriti Tiwary, Adv.
    Mr. Shirish Kohli, Adv.
    Mr. Rewant Singh, Adv.

    Mr. Shubham Sahota, Adv.
    Ms. Aastha Anand, Adv.

    Mr. Devesh Ajmani, Adv.

    For Respondent(s) :Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR
    Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Adv.
    Ms. Dorjee Ongmu Lachungpa, Adv.

    5

    Mr. Priyanshu Teotia, Adv.

    UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
    O R D E R

    1. Heard

    2. Leave granted.

    3. The criminal appeal is allowed in terms of the signed

    order which is placed on the file.

    4. Pending applications(s), if any, shall stand disposed

    of.

    (DEEPANSHU)                                   (AVGV RAMU)
    SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT                COURT MASTER (NSH)
    
    
    
    
                                   6
    



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here