IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B. A. No. 9602 of 2025

Vinay Kumar Choubey, aged about 49 years, son of Devendra Choubey,

resident of 4, Kanke Road, P.O. and P.S. Kanke, District-Ranchi

...... … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand through ACB, (Vigilance) .…. … Opposite Party

--------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate

Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate

For the ACB : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate

: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate

: Ms. Shruti Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Nillohit Choubey, Advocate

04/ 06.01.2026: Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel for the A.C.B.

2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Hazaribagh A.C.B. P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025 registered under sections 409, 467, 468, 471, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under section 13(2) and 13(1) (c) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 1988, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance (ACB), Hazaribagh and by way of this petition the petitioner

is seeking regular bail.

3. Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner was not named as an accused in the F.I.R. but subsequently he has been made accused in the instant case and he has been taken into custody by the prosecuting agency. He next submits that the petitioner has been made an accused in the instant case only on account of the fact that the petitioner was the then Deputy

Commissioner, Hazaribag and petitioner had joined the office as Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh on 26.05.2008 and he remained there till 05.10.2010. He next submits that the present case is outcome of preliminary enquiry being 24 of 2015 which was conducted by A.C.B on the complaint made by one Tripurari Singh 10 years ago who happens to be a journalist and the said enquiry was conducted with respect to the orders which were not passed by the petitioner and even the said orders were passed 17 years back when the petitioner was posted as Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh. He then submits that any order with respect to land relating to the khas mahal land are being passed under the Khas Mahal Estate Manual and on the directions of the Government. He further submits that only on the approval of the State Government said land has been transferred. He next submits that lessee has made an application for renewal of the lease which was registered as Lease Renewal Case No. 85/2007-08 and they have also made a prayer with respect to removing the word “Sevayat” and petitioner being the Deputy Commissioner has passed an order to delete the word “Sevayat” from Register-II and further recommended for renewal of the lease to the State Government through Divisional Commissioner. He further submits that this allegation is false in the F.I.R against the petitioner and petitioner has not passed any order to remove the word ‘sevayat’ and only forwarded the proposal put up by the Additional Collector in lease renewal case record no. 85/2007-08 to Divisional Commissioner for the State Government to take a decision in the matter and further action was taken after the approval of the State Government was obtained vide Memo No. 1502 dated 18.06.2009 thereafter the land in question has been transferred. He then submits that the petitioner has only forwarded the same and noting of the other officers have been placed before the petitioner and in view of that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He next submits that allegation of not taking care of the order dated 26.07.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4200 of 2000 of the High Court is not against the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has not passed any order and onl