[2025: JHHC:10673] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2243 of 2025 ------ Md. Nasim Ahmed @ Nasiran Ahmad, aged 46 years, son of Late Maujuddin, resident of Village Sogra Waaf Estate Naheri Mohalla Biharsarif, PO & PS Biharsarif, District Nalanda (Bihar). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Farhin Shad, W/o Md. Nasim Ahmed @ Nasiran Ahmad, D/o Md. Ekbal, resident of Mohalla Bus Stand Machhli Mohalla, PO Giridih, PS Giridih (Town), District Giridih (Jharkhand). .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kr. Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 07-04-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 381 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 323, 498A, 352, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the husband of the complainant/opposite party No.2, treated her with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry and caused hurt to her. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that because of some marital discord, this false case has been foisted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is working as Office Superintendent in Indian Railways. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and to keep and maintain the opposite party No.2 with full honour and dignity as his lawful wife if and when she resumes conjugal life with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the opposite party No.2 in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be also given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above- named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs. 25,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih in connection with Complaint Case No. 381 of 2024 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and he will keep and maintain the opposite party No.2 with full honour and dignity as his lawful wife if and when she resumes conjugal life with him and he will not annoy or disturb her in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) RKM/