Bishal Rajdev @ Vishal Rajdeo vs State of Jharkhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 833

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Bishal Rajdev @ Vishal Rajdeo – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate, Mr. Manish Kumar, Mr. Jay Shanker Tiwary, Ms. Priya Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Addl. P.P

Table of Content
1. grant of anticipatory bail based on facts presented. (Para 1 , 2)
2. allegations and arguments regarding accusations and legal standing. (Para 3)
3. state's opposition to anticipatory bail. (Para 4)
4. conditions for granting anticipatory bail. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the parties.

2. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Chowka P.S. Case No.57 of 2022 instituted under sections 409, 418, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the I.P.C, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being the employee of Anil Goel who is the owner of Lucky Coke Groups, in criminal conspiracy with the co- accused persons committed criminal breach of trust, causing huge amount of loss to the informant and fabricated ledger account by making false entry in the register and did not pay Rs.4 crores approximately and the quality of LAM Coke supplied by the petitioners will not be up to the mark. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is submitted that petitioners are neither the partner nor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document