ANAND KUMAR vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PANKAJ KUMAR, ,ARPITA SINHA — Cr.M.P./1358/2026
Case under An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 316(3),BNS. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 07th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010138832026
Filing Number
Cr.M.P./8952/2026
Filing Date
23-04-2026
Registration No
Cr.M.P./1358/2026
Registration Date
04-05-2026
Judge
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Quashing Matter ( 206 )
Sub-Category
Quashing of Entire Criminal Proceedings ( 7 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
ANAND KUMAR
Adv. ABHIJEET KUMAR SINGH,SHAILESH KR SINGH,SHAILESH KR SINGH, ,SHAILESH KR SINGH
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PANKAJ KUMAR, ,ARPITA SINHA
AMIT KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Fresh Filing (Admission)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Fresh Filing (Admission) |
Orders
The Jharkhand High Court quashed criminal proceedings against Anand Kumar registered under Section 316(3) BNS (Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 0326/2025), finding the offense involved was a private dispute rather than a heinous crime. The court held that since the petitioner and informant had completely settled their differences, continuation of prosecution would constitute abuse of process and cause extreme injustice, making conviction remote and bleak under Supreme Court precedent guidelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Jharkhand High Court quashed criminal proceedings against Anand Kumar registered under Section 316(3) BNS (Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 0326/2025), finding the offense involved was a private dispute rather than a heinous crime. The court held that since the petitioner and informant had completely settled their differences, continuation of prosecution would constitute abuse of process and cause extreme injustice, making conviction remote and bleak under Supreme Court precedent guidelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts