Md. Adil Azhar, aged about 30 years, son of late Athar, resident of Chistia v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Ghore Oraon, son of Late Chhot Ganura Oraon
Case Details
2025:JHHC:38608 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 454 of 2025 Md. Adil Azhar, aged about 30 years, son of late Athar, resident of Chistia Building , Circular Road, Lalpur , near K.C. Roy Hospital, P.O. and P.S. Lalpur , District Ranchi, Jharkhand … Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Ghore Oraon, son of Late Chhot Ganura Oraon , resident of village Chama, P.O. and P.S. , Kanke, District Ranchi, Jharkhand …… Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- ----- For the Appellant For the State For the Informant : Mr. Nikhilesh Chatterjee, Advocate : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha,A.P.P. : Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advocate ….. Pronounced on 12/12/2025 This Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 454 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the appellant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025, instituted under sections 126(2), 115(2), 329 (3), 338, 336 (3, 340(2), 318(4), 3(5) , 352, 351(2), 351(3), 61 (2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. The prosecution case on the basis of written report of the informant namely Ghore Oraon, in brief, is that he is an illiterate tribal. He has land of 5 Acres 37 Decimals in Khata No. 18. Kaimi Plot Nos. 1010, 1038, 1107, 1108, 1111, 37, 450, 494, 495, 501, 588, 59, 502, 616, 617, 639, 732, 89. Out of the said land Plot No. 1010, 1038, 588, 59 has been sold by land broker Umesh Toppo, Shankar Kujur, Rajesh Linda showing his kaimi land as auction land to non-tribal in connivance with Circle Officer, Kanke and employees of the office after making wrong document and making online 1 2025:JHHC:38608 manipulation regarding removal of his land entry from online Register-II. They also got issuance of online rent receipt of his land stopped after 2021. The accused persons also forcefully took the possession of the land and got boundary wall constructed and they also assaulted him and gave threatening and took his thumb impression on blank paper and also took his signature. He has also land in other khata and in which Khata Nos. 18, 119, 120 is Bakast Bhuihari land, in Khata No. 119, Plot Nos. 596, 606, 1022, 1056, 1020, 1015, 1008, 587, 600, 708, 713, 716, 747, 1011, 1012, 1128 total Area 10 Acres 27 Decimals and in Khata No. 120, Plot No. 603, 604, 605, 676, 715, 748, 755, 759, 760, 995, 1001, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1014, 1019, 1054, 1062, 1114, 1127, 1117 total Area 8 Acres 66 Decimals and out of the said land from Khata Nos. 119, 120 total Area 10 Acres is being sold by Umesh Toppo, Shankar Kujur, Rajesh Linda and Kamlesh Singh to non-tribal and are also constructing boundary. When he visits that place for stopping the work of boundary then Kamlesh and his Associates get them assaulted and abused them publicly denoting his caste in order to insult him. 3. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.P.P. on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the Informant . 4.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged or at all and has falsely been implicated in this case at the instance of the respondent No. 2. It is submitted that the appellant is not named in the FIR. However during investigation, his name came on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused persons, who have been arrested 2 2025:JHHC:38608 by the police. It is submitted that as a matter of fact during investigation, co-accused namely Umesh Toppo, and Praveen Jaiswal, Shahrukh Khan and who had been arrested by the police and they have confessed their guilt and disclosed the name of the appellant and others as their associates. It is submitted that the appellant was the employee of the Kanke Resort and he is not involved in any kind of affairs of the owner of Kanke Resort. It is submitted that save and except confessional statement of the co-accused namely Umesh Toppo, Praveen Jaiswal and Shahrukh Khan made before the police , there no evidence as against the appellant and the confessional statement before the police has no evidentiary value. It is submitted that after registration of the instant first information report, a notice under Section 35 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been issued to the appellant, in which the appellant has replied to the said notice. It is submitted that the Co-accused Brajesh Kumar Singh has been granted Anticipatory Bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 415 of 2025 vide order date 17.07.2025and hence the appellant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the appellant is not named in the FIR but he is also one of the main conspirators with other co-accused person. It is submitted that the appellant is associate of Co-accused Brajesh Kumar Singh, Umesh Toppo, Shankar Kujur. It is submitted that the Police has recorded the confessional statements of the Co-accused Umesh Toppo, Praveen Kumar Jaiswal , Md . Sharukh @ Md. Sharukh which are mentioned at para 30,42,45 of the case 3 2025:JHHC:38608 diary and they have named the appellant as their associate with other Co-accused persons in selling the land of Informant. Para 17,18,24 of the case diary are the statements of Co-accused namely Umesh Toppo, Praveen Kumar Jaiswal, Md .Sharukh @ Md. Sharukh and thereafter confessional statement of the accused Umesh Toppo, Praveen Kumar Jaiswal, Md . Sharukh @ Md. Sharukh were recorded at para 30, para 42 and para 45 of the case diary and they have confessed their guilt also. It is submitted that para 32, para 44 and para 47 show the recovery of the Mobile Phone from the house of Umesh Toppo, Praveen Kumar Jaiswal, Md . Sharukh @ Md. Sharukh and hence, the prayer for an anticipatory bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Learned counsel for Informant, after adopting the submission of learned APP has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant namely Md. Adil Azarand further submitted that the appellant has actively connived with the other accused persons incheating the Informant and also for selling his lands to non-Tribal people. It is submitted that the Informant in his statementat paragraph -2 and the witnesses namely Ganesh Oraon , Mahendra Oraon,Tetri Devi and Bandhan Oraon, whose statement have been recorded at para 7 to para 10 of the case diary, have fully supported the case of the Informant to selling the land of the Informant for Non- Tribal people and for threatening and assaulting him. It is submitted that the witnesses namely Diwakar Prasad Chandrika Prasad Dwivedi, then Anchal Adhikari, Kanke at para 79, has supported the case of the Informant and stated that the appellant has cheated the Informant and sold his lands and the appellant was involved in tempering the online data base of NIC. Even the statement 4 2025:JHHC:38608 of Chandrika Prasad Dwivedi was recorded under section 183 of BNSS who has fully supported the case of the Informant which is mentioned at para 85 of the case diary. It is submitted that the police has submitted the charge-sheet against both the appellants under section 126(2), 115(2), 329 (3), 338, 336 (3, 340(2), 318(4), 3(5) , 352, 351(2), 351(3), 61 (2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Actand henceprayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants namely Md. Adil Azar may be rejected. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of learned counsels for both the sides. 8. It appears from the FIR that the Informant had alleged that the accused persons namely Umesh Toppo, Shankar Kujur, Rajesh Linda and Kamlesh Singh have sold the land of the Informant to non-tribal people in connivance with the Officers and employees of the Anchal Officer at Kanke and they have sold his five (05) Acres 37 dismal land and eight (08) acres 66 dismal land on various Khata Number, plot number. Wheneven they want to stop the construction of boundary by the purchasers then they were assaulted and abused by the accused persons and others. It is alleged that the accused persons taken his LTI and thumb impression and other family members on the blank papers for selling their land and his nature of Bhuiyari land had been changed and the accused persons had taken possession of his land. It also appears that the Informant had alleged for selling his land by the accused person Umesh Toppo, Shankar Kujur, Rajesh Linda and Kamlesh Singh. 9. It appears from the subsequent statement of the Informant recorded at para 2 and statement of the witnesses 5 2025:JHHC:38608 namely Ganesh Oraon, Mahendra Oraon, Tetri Devi and Bandhan Oraon whose statement has been recorded at para 2 , 7,8,9 and 10 of the case diary , that they have supported the case of the Informant. 10 It appears that the appellant is not named in the FIR. 11. It appears that allegation against the appellant is that he is the Employee of the accused Brajesh Kumar Singh . 12. It appears that Brajesh Kumar Singh has already granted anticipatory bail in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 415 of 2025 vide order dated 17.07.2025 by this Court. 13. It appears that general allegation has been made against the appellant mentioned above. 14. It appears that he had made accused on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Praveen Kumar Jaiswal and Md. Sharukh @ Md. Shahrukh statement recorded at para 42 and para 45 of the case-diary 15. It reveals that even Diwakar Prasad Chandrika Prasad Dwivedi during statement before police under section 180 BNSS, has stated that online tampering was done in connivance with several accused persons Praveen Jaiswal, Md. Sharukh @ Md. Shahrukh, Summudin Ansari, Adil i.e. the appellant, Umesh Toppo, Gunjan Singh @ Mayank Bhujan and several others. 16. It appears the accused Umesh Toppo was also granted regular bail in B.A. No. 6154 of 2025 vide order dated 23.07.2025 passed by Co- ordinate Bench ( Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath) of this Court and Co-accused person Brajesh Kumar Singh has already granted anticipatory bail in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 415 of 2025 vide order dated 17.07.2025 and co-accused Kamlesh Kumar has also 6 2025:JHHC:38608 granted bail in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 641 of 2025 vide order dated 17.09.2025 by this Court. 17. Considering the facts and the circumstances of this case, and also the fact that the other co-accused has been granted bail by this Court and the appellant Md. Adil Azhar is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the appellant Md. Adil Azhar is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sri Yashwant Prakash, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in connection with Kanke P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025 , subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be the own relative of the appellant having moveable //immoveable properties own his specific name in the district of Ranchi and the appellant shall file an Undertaking before the learned Court below that he will not get indulged in such type of crime in future again, they will not leave the jurisdiction of Civil Court Ranchi without prior permission and the appellant will submit his copy of Adhar Card and Mobile Number before the learned Trial Court below, which he will always keep active and will not change it, during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of the Court and otherwise prosecution will be at liberty to take steps for cancellation his bail. 18. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 454 of 2025 is
Decision
allowed and stands disposed of . (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Bibha/ 7 2025:JHHC:38608 8