Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 2873
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (PIL) No. 809 of 2022
Pankaj Kumar Yadav, aged about 34 years, Son of Raj Kishore Pd. Yadav, Resident of – Gayatri Nagar, Sudna, Post Office- Sudna, Police Station- Daltonganj, District Palamau, Jharkhand.... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
3. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand, F.F.P.Building, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The In-Charge Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand, F.F.P. Building, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
5. Birendra Ram, In-Charge Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand, F.F.P. Building, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.
6. The Commissioner, Income Tax Investigation Department, Central Revenue Building. 5A, Mahatma Gandhi Main Road, Ranchi, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.- Lower Bazar, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand.
7. The Director, Enforcement Directorate, 1st & 2nd Floor, MTNL Building, Jawaharlal Nehru, Stadium Marg, P.O. & P.S.- Stadium Marg, District- New Delhi- 110002.... Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ PRASAD
For the Petitioner: Mr Rajeev Kumar, Advocate
Mrs Niteshwari Kumari, Advocate
For the State: Mr Vibhor Mayank, A.C. to A.G.
For the ITD: Mr Kumar Vaibhav, Sr. S.C.
Mr Durgesh Agarwal, Advocate
For the ED: Mr Amit Kumar Das, Sr. Advocate
Mr Saurav Kumar, Advocate
Reserved on: 01.10.2026
Pronounced on: 14/10/2026
Per M. S. Sonak, C.J.
(M. S. Sonak, C.J.)
(Manoj Prasad, J.)
October 14, 2026
A.F.R. Manoj/Cp.2 Uploaded on 14.10.2026
1. Heard Mr Rajeev Kumar, who appears with Mrs Niteshwari Kumari for the petitioner, Mr Vibhor Mayank, learned A.C. to A.G., for respondents Nos. 1 to 5; Mr Kumar Vaibhav, learned Sr. Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent; and Mr Amit Kumar Das, learned Senior Advocate for the 7th respondent.
2. This petitioner, by way of purported public interest, seeks the following reliefs: -
| SN | Bridges | Rivers | Total Amounts |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | District of Dhanbad Nirsa | Barakar River | 35 Crore |
| (b) | District of Khunti Karra | Tajna River | 2.15 Crore Bridge |
| (c) | District of Palamau | Koyal River | 4.25 Crore Daltonganj |
| (d) | District of Gumla (i) Kedeng-Jairagi Path | Sankh River | 1.84 Crore |
| (ii) Bhikhampur Jari Path | Lava River | 1.18 Crore | |
| (iii) Basia Jola Ghat | South Koyal River | 5.65 Crore | |
| (iv) Bishunpur Chainpur Path | North Koyal River | 1.35 Crore | |
| (v) Bishunpur Samdari Path | North Koyal River | 1.57 Crore | |
| (vi) Kamdara Bano Path | South Koyal River | 2.91 Crore |
At that point of time Birendra Ram was the Chief Engineer of Special Division and on his admission, the bridges collapsed during the period he was Chief Engineer Special Division.
A. For the direction upon the respondents to enquire & investigate the reasons for collapse of bridges in different part of the State of Jharkhand which is evident from audit report of Principal Accountant General of the State of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
B. For the direction upon the respondents to call for a report from the respondent no. 2 & 3 as to why action has not been initiated against the top most bosses of Rural Development Department where bridges have collapsed & action has not been taken although office of Principal Accountant Ranchi has submitted a report & it has widely mentioned the cause of collapse of bridges.
C. For the direction upon the respondent no. 6 & 7 to initiate investigation against respondents no. 5 Birendra Ram Chief Engineer Rural Development Department. Now In-Charge Engineer in Chief Rural Development Department.
D. For the direction upon the respondents to stop the functioning of the respondent no. 5 from the post of Engineer-in-Chief, Under Rural Development Department, as Rs. 2.45 crores cash has been recovered from the possession of his nephew who is an unemployed, and his wife was supposed to contest election from the same money & no investigation has been done is this regards.
E. For the direction upon the respondent no. 7 to investigate further, the sources of Rs. 2.45 crores recovered from the possession of Alok Ranjan nephew of respondent no. 5 from rented premises & also submit status of investigation.
F. For any other of the relief or relief.
3. In substance, the gravamen of the instant petition centres on respondent No. 5, Birendra Ram, who, at the time of the institution of these proceedings, was serving as the In-Charge Engineer-in- Chief in the Rural Development Department of the Government of Jharkhand. The petitioner's case is that the series of bridge collapses enumerated hereinabove occurred during respondent No. 5's tenure as Chief Engineer, Special Division, primarily due to his alleged deliberate disregard of mandatory rules and scientific requirements.
4. The petitioner has further alleged that unaccounted cash amounting to approximately Rs. 2.45 crores was recovered and seized from the possession of the nephew of respondent No. 5, leading to the registration of Jamshedpur P.S. Case No. 13 of 2019, dated 13.11.2019, under S. 7(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner further contends that the seized cash belonged to respondent No. 5 and was amassed through corrupt and fraudulent practices.
5. The petitioner has also alleged that, despite the availability of prima facie incriminating material, the State investigating agencies failed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation, thereby enabling respondent No. 5 to continue in office.
6. It is, therefore, the petitioner'
