THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK
Ranchi, Feb 19: The Jharkhand High Court on Thursday stayed further proceedings, including investigation, in two FIRs arising out of a road incident in Doranda involving advocate Manoj Tandon, and directed that no coercive steps be taken against him until the next date of hearing.
Hearing the petition, Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi also directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Ranchi, to take stock of the situation and ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioner.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on March 24, 2026.
Allegations of harassment over minor accident
Appearing for Tandon, Ritu Kumar argued the matter along with senior advocate A.K. Kashyap and advocates Rajendra Krishna, Abhay Kumar Mishra, Siddharth Ranjan, Akansha Priya, Piyush Kumar Roy, Amritansh Vats and Karamjit Singh Chhabra.
It was submitted that on February 17 at around 10 a.m., while Tandon was on his way to the High Court, a motorcycle allegedly came in front of his car, resulting in a minor collision. An altercation followed.
The counsel alleged that Tandon was kept at Doranda Police Station from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. and that his car was taken into custody. It was argued that initially no seizure memo had been prepared and that the police were acting in violation of Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs arrest procedures.
Two FIRs—Doranda P.S. Case No. 51 of 2026 and Doranda P.S. Case No. 52 of 2026—were registered under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
ALSO READ: Jharkhand CM salutes Kerala parents for daughter’s organ donation
Plea for CBI/NIA probe, concerns over bias
Tandon sought transfer of investigation in both cases to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), alleging that the two FIRs arising out of the same occurrence had been handed over to different investigating officers.
During arguments, the counsel also alleged that the investigating officer in one of the cases was conducting a “media trial” over what was described as a petty road accident.
It was further submitted before the Court that while the petitioner’s car had been seized, the motorcycle had initially not been seized.
The Counsel produced before the Court the Instagram profile of the motorcyclist, stating that he claimed to be a software engineer working with TCS and had allegedly posted slogans associated with the People’s Front of India (PFI), described in court as a banned organisation in Jharkhand. On this basis, it was argued that the matter required investigation by a central agency, including the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
The petitioner also alleged that gangs in Ranchi were targeting car owners by intentionally hitting vehicles and then demanding money. It was further alleged that around 100 persons had surrounded the petitioner’s house and that a mob had gathered at the police station, raising apprehensions of arrest.
Court refers to Supreme Court arrest guidelines
The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s judgments in Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar (2014), D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal (1997), and Md. Asfak Alam vs State of Jharkhand (2023), reiterating that arrests must strictly follow statutory safeguards.
The Court observed that where two cases arise out of the same incident, they should ordinarily be investigated by the same investigating officer.
At the same time, the Court acknowledged the principle laid down in Neeharika Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Maharashtra (2021) that investigation at the initial stage of an FIR should not ordinarily be stayed.
Lawyers express support in court
The order records that several lawyers present in court supported the petitioner’s submissions, including Rajendra Krishna, Chairman of the Jharkhand State Bar Council, Jitendra Shankar Singh, Rajiv Kumar, Navin Kumar, Krishna Murari, Amritansh Vats and senior advocate Anil Kumar Kashyap, among others.
Interim relief granted
Considering the submissions and the gravity of the situation, the Court stayed further proceedings, including investigation, in both cases.
It further directed that no coercive steps be taken against Manoj Tandon in connection with Case No. 51 of 2026, pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class-XIII, Ranchi, until the next date of hearing.
On a query from the Court, the State’s counsel submitted that seizure memos of both vehicles had now been prepared.
The State, Union of India and CBI have been granted time to file counter-affidavits.
The case will next be heard on March 24