Vikky Kumar vs. The State Of Jharkhand

A.B.A./7110/2025HC JharkhandGSTCNR JHHC01040156202512 December 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, Vikky Kumar, is seeking anticipatory bail in Ratu P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025, registered under Sections 317(4), 317(5), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner operates a scrap business and his firm is registered for GST. The FIR was registered based on the assumption that articles kept in his scrap store were stolen. The petitioner has presented tax invoices, e-way bills, and transportation challans as evidence. The State opposes the prayer, citing allegations of keeping scrap articles in the store.

Held

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The reasoning was based on the attending facts and circumstances, specifically noting that the petitioner is engaged in a scrap business, his firm is registered for GST, and he has provided supporting documents such as tax invoices, e-way bills, and transportation challans. The Court found these factors sufficient to warrant the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petitioner was directed to surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, within three weeks and, upon surrender or arrest, to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (implied by the context of anticipatory bail application), considering the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023? The petitioner argued that his firm is registered for GST and has submitted relevant tax documents (tax invoice, e-way bill, transportation challan) to demonstrate the legitimacy of his business transactions. He contends that the FIR is based solely on an assumption that the stored articles were stolen. The State argued that there are allegations of the petitioner keeping scrap articles in his store, which forms the basis of the FIR.

Sections Cited

Section 482(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:JHHC:37422] -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A.B.A. No. 7110 of 2025

Vikky Kumar, aged about 34 years, S/o-Uday Prasad, R/o -Village Devnagar, Opp. Bali Bhagat Complex, Near Hanuman Mandir, Kathal More, Ratu, Simariya, P.O and P.S-Ratu, Dist- Ranchi, Jharkhand.

..... … Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand

..... … Opposite Party

-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate. For the State

: Mrs. Bandana Sinha, A.P.P. ------

05/ 12.12.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ratu P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 317(4), 317(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Jharkhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.