IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2901 of 2024 ------ Faizan Ansari @ Md. Faizan Ansari @ Faijan Ansari, aged about 34 years, son of Md. Usman, resident of Village- Patagada Kala, P.O.-Kocheye, P.S.-Nagar Untari, Dist.- Garhwa, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, Advocate : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.10 Dated- 04.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Meral P.S. Case No.412 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under sections 120B/406/420/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner facilitated the money transaction on behalf of the company as accountant by issuing documents and giving assurance on behalf of the company and being the brother-in-law of the main accused-Md. Sahabuddin who has since died. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the co-accused Md. Sahabuddin died under mysterious circumstance. It is then submitted that no cause of action for lodging the FIR has taken place within the jurisdiction of Meral police station and the petitioner has not cheated the depositor nor has collected or taken money nor issued any receipt or any document in regard to any financial transaction. It is also submitted that the co-accused Hasina Bibi who is the sister of the petitioner and Ajrul Miyan who is the father-in-law have been given the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 04.10.2023 in A.B.A. No. 3135 of 2023 subject to jointly depositing the cheated amount of Rs.9,88,000/- but they neither deposited the cheated amount nor surrendered before the learned trial court even after being given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of being in criminal conspiracy with co-accused persons having cheated and committed criminal breach of trust and also created false document to commit forgery for the purpose of cheating. It is next submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the case and for recovery of the cheated amount. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the requirement of custodial interrogation of the petitioner during the investigation of the case, this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-