KISHOR SAW v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2025-12-11. KISHOR SAW v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
2025:JHHC:37228 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A. B. A. No. 5770 of 2025 ---- Kishor Saw, aged about 41 years, son of Baijnath Saw, resident of Village Koshilwa, PO and PS Sadar, District Chatra.... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. B. N. Ojha, Advocate ---- 5/11. 12. 2025 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sadar P. S. Case No. 139 of 2024, for offence registered under section 15, 18, 27, 29 of NDPS Act, pending in court of learned Additional Sessions Judge V Cum Special Judge, NDPS, Act, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that 55 kg opium doda was recovered from the house of Baijnath Sao who happened to be father of the petitioner Baijnath Sao.
He submits that allegation is made that father of this petitioner and this petitioner both were indulged in such business. He further submits that there is no role of the petitioner and in view of that the petitioner may kindly be granted anticipatory bail 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that it has come in the investigation and it has been disclosed in counter affidavit that the petitioner and his father both were indulged in such activity. He also submits that the petitioner is having one criminal antecedent of similar nature and that has come in the report of the officer incharge of Sadar Police station, Chatra. 5. Considering that father and son both are indulged in such activity and the petitioner is having one criminal antecedent of similar nature, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected and as such, this anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J. ) 11. 12. 2025 SI/
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.