2025:JHHC:20059 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3549 of 2025 ----- 1.Pradeep Kumar Mehta, S/o Vijay Mahto 2.Kaushalya Devi, W/o Pradeep Kumar Mehta, both are R/o Village Sarauna, P.O. Tetarai, P.S. Panki, District Palamau, Jharkhand .... Petitioner(s). Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party(s). ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishna Kishore Mehta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, AddI. P.P. …...... 05/ 21.07.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application filed by the petitioners praying for grant of anticipatory bail in terms of Sections 482 and 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 apprehending their arrest for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 34 of IPC. 3. The informant, Sintu Kumari, lodged an F.I.R. on 05.12.2024 at 3:10 P.M. against the accused persons Pradeep Kumar Mehta (petitioner No.1) and his wife Kaushalya Devi (petitioner No.2), alleging incidents of cheating that occurred in December 2023. The petitioners representing themselves as officials of the "Vanu Kisan Sahayata Foundation" and associated with "Gudiya Arpan," visited Bhusara village under the pretext of appointing Ward Teachers and Panchayat Directors. They allegedly collected huge money from the informant and others—for making ID cards, student admissions, and Kisan Cards— promising educational materials and employment benefits. Despite collecting ₹2,24,500/- from Murma Panchayat and ₹1,21,055/- from Pandwa Panchayat, no promised services, salaries, or materials were provided. The informant alleges that the accused dishonestly misappropriated the said amounts and cheated in a planned manner. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that these petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that no offence is made out under the alleged Sections. He submits that the appointment of the informant and others are genuine. He submits that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are husband and wife respectively and wife has no role in the alleged offence. He also submits that the informant in her complaint admitted the fact that she will be given a fixed salary per month. He alleges that the contents of the FIR are factually incorrect. The money received by these petitioners was used for the facilities of the children. He finally submits that the petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents against them. Thus, on these aforesaid grounds, he prayed that the instant anticipatory bail should be allowed. 5. Learned Counsel on behalf of the State vehemently opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail. He submits that the petitioners have cheated innocent people by giving false promises. As per him there are enough material on record to suggest the involvement of these petitioners. He submits that a huge amount is involved in the alleged offence. Thus, on these grounds he prays that the instant anticipatory bail should be dismissed. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials on record as well as the impugned order, I find that the allegation against these petitioners is of cheating several people. They had taken money on the pretext of proving materials etc. but neither provided the materials nor refunded the money rather, misappropriated the same. 7. Considering the nature of allegation against these petitioners where they have duped many persons and misappropriated a huge amount of money, this Court is of the considered view that this case needs a thorough investigation, including the investigation in presence of the petitioners, if required. Thus, I find that this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners in connection with Pandwa P.S. Case No.87 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamu at Daltonganj, stands rejected. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S./