2025:JHHC:6720 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.4200 of 2024 Anil Kumar, Aged about 36 years, Son of Late Mathura Mistry, Resident of At Qtr. No.1083, Sector – 12 F, P.O. + P.S- Sector 12, Bokaro Steel City, District – Bokaro (Jharkhand) …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Neha Sharma @ Kitu, Daughter of Babu Lal Sharma, Resident of village- Chandrakal Apartment Flat No.3D, Patel Nagar, Hatia, P.O- Hatia, P.S- Jagarnathpur, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand … Opp. Parties -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Mishra, Advocate Ms. Adya Mishra, Advocate Mr. Krishna Prajapati, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Santosh Kr. Jha, Advocate ------ 11/02.09.2025 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ranchi Mahila P.S. Case No.11 of 2024, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 498A, 323, 313, 506, 307, 34 of IPC and under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. 3. Vide order dated 25.02.2025, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 4. The said order has been challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cr. Appeal No.3233 of 2025, which has been decided by order dated 29th July 2025 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to set-aside the said order and restored this ABA to the High 2025:JHHC:6720 2 Court and requested the High Court to decide the present ABA afresh on its own merit. Thereafter, Hon’ble the Chief Justice has assigned this matter to this Bench and that is why, this case has been listed today. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner happens to be the husband of the informant and the allegations are made of demand of dowry and of assault. He submits that the informant has gone under medical check up and it was informed that the child in womb is suffering from Triple X Syndrome and the doctor has advised for abortion and under the medical advice, the abortion was made. To buttress this argument, he refers to the medical report as contained in Annexure -2. He further submits that the petitioner has replied the notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and the petitioner has further tried to streamline the things between him and his wife, however that have not materialized. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State and the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer and submit that the petitioner is the husband. They further submit that the allegations are made of demand of dowry and the allegation of assault is also there and in view that the anticipatory bail may not be granted. 7. In view of the above and considering the fact that the petitioner has replied the notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and in the light of the medical report, the decision has been taken of abortion, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such 2025:JHHC:6720 3 terms and condition or sureties, as the learned Court may deem fit and proper. 8. This Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) R.Kumar