High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 JH CK 3740

Uday Saw @ Uday Lal Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 11 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 4465 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 409 words

2/11.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Keredari P.S. Case No. 34 of 2023, for the offences registered under Sections 143/341/427/353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Damage to Public Property Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hazaribagh.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. As per the allegation, an agency namely, Jai Ambe Road Lines Pvt. Ltd. was engaged by the NTPC on 05.01.2023 for transportation of coal from Chatti Bariyatu Coal Mining Project, however, due to continuous agitation and blocking of transit road by 22 named accused persons including the petitioner and 150 villagers, the said agency failed to start the transportation of coal. He next submits that the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R, however, he is the land loser and was making agitation demanding the legitimate compensation and rehabilitation as per the scheme of NTPC. He also submits that the petitioner is a poor villager and he undertake to co-operate in the ongoing investigation. He next submits that co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in A.B.A. Nos. 1671 of 2026 and 3110 of 2024 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Hence, he may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

4.

Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that allegations of stopping the trucks and disconnecting the route of coal transportation and causing loss to the company are there against the petitioner.

5.

Considering that petitioner has been named in the F.I.R, however, he is the land loser and was making agitation demanding the legitimate compensation and rehabilitation as per the scheme of NTPC and the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail as aforesaid by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest/surrender within three weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Keredari P.S. Case No. 34/2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.