Prantik Kumar vs State of Jharkhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(SC) 132

J. B. PARDIWALA, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Prantik Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Amit Pai, Adv. Ms. Avantika Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Parijat Chandan, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nitesh Ranjan, AOR

ORDER

1. Delay condoned.

2. Exemption Applications are allowed.

3. The petitioners father and son respectively have been denied anticipatory bail by the High Court of Jharkhand in connection with the First Information Report No.0184 dated 10-6-2023 registered with Adityapur Police Station, State of Jharkhand, for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the “IPC”) respectively.

4. The case of the first informant is plain and simple. He claims to be a unpaid seller. There was a business transaction between the first informant and the accused persons in connection with purchase of craft papers. According to the first informant, an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- and odd remains due and payable by the petitioners towards the business transaction. In such circumstances, the FIR came to be lodged for the offence of cheating etc.

5. The petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with the First Information Report, referred to above, prayed for anticipatory bail first before the Sessions Court. As the Sessions Court declined, they went before the High Court. The High Court has passed two very unusual orders and that too

Click Here to Read the rest of this document