Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Vijay Pratap Singh S/o Jineshwar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Anti-Corruption Bureau (A.C.B.).
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hazaribagh ACB P.S. Case No.09 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 409, 467, 468 (inadvertently indicated u/s 469 in impugned order), 471, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) and 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge, Vigilance (A.C.B.) Hazaribag.
3. By order dated 16.10.2025, this anticipatory bail application is restricted to Sudhir Kumar Singh, who is petitioner no.2, as Vijay Pratap Singh, who is the petitioner no.1, was already arrested.
4. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that case is arising out of the complaint made to the Vigilance (A.C.B.) alleging that the petitioner is Power of Attorney holder of the recorded settlees has facilitated transfer of Khas Mahal Land situated in Hazaribagh in favour of several purchasers and that w
The court emphasized strict adherence to prohibitions against the unlawful transfer of property, basing its decision on the severity of allegations and the uncooperative behavior of the petitioner du....
The court emphasized that a Power of Attorney holder implicated in fraudulent land transfer with substantial evidence of collusion cannot be granted bail.
The court granted bail considering the petitioner's age, health conditions, cooperative stance during the investigation, and insufficient grounds for continued detention despite allegations of corrup....
Government officials must act in accordance with legal mandates, and failure to do so, especially in corruption cases, justifies denial of bail and necessitates custodial interrogation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion in granting anticipatory bail based on concrete facts and the need to balance the prevention of harassment with the requirem....
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC emphasizes the presumption of innocence and the principle of 'bail not jail,' allowing for a liberal interpretation favoring the applicants unless comp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the emphasis on the parameters for considering application for anticipatory bail and the guiding principles for dealing with the application under ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
