2025:JHHC:15232 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5053 of 2024 ---- Virendra Singh @ Birendra Singh, S/o Late Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, R/o B- 314, Nilgiri Garden, Ashiyana Enclave, Dimna Road, P.O & P.S.- M.G.M., Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim …… Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Girish M. Singh , Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate ---- 07/ 11.06.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing for the victim. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No. 236/2021 (G.R. No.6 of 2023), for the offences under Sections 313, 376, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian penal Code, pending in the court of J.M.F.C., Jamshedpur. 3. It has been alleged by the informant that she met Advocate Virendra Singh in the year 2017 for consultation with regard to her cases pending in Civil Court, Jamshedpur. One of the cases was against the informant’s husband and for the same advocate Virendra Singh was engaged for doing Pairvi. It has been further alleged that the advocate compelled her to make physical relation with him in the year 2019-2020 and tempted her that he would purchase a flat for her. The informant, in the mean time, got pregnant and later was made to abort the pregnancy in Adityapur Hospital on 25.09.2020 by the advocate. The advocate then stopped meeting her. When the informant went to the house of the advocate to talk, the advocate and his son abused the informant with filthy language and threatened her about dire consequences. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was engaged by the informant to conduct her multiple cases, which the petitioner 2025:JHHC:15232 2 conducted with utmost professional ethics. Learned counsel further contended that in fact the petitioner had stopped conducting cases for the informant and had returned her files and records. He also submitted that there was an agreement to sell a plot of land measuring 800 sq.ft. between the petitioner and the informant for which the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- to the informant, however, no sale deed has been executed and the informant refuses to return the said amount and also threatened to implicate him in a false case. The informant had also instituted a false case being Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.- 125/2019 u/s 341, 323, 504, 506, 34 of Indian Penal code in the year 2019 against the petitioner and his son, wherein they are on bail. Learned counsel submits that the present F.I.R. has been lodged only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner never met the informant again after the institution of the false case in 2019 being Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.- 125/2019. There is lapse of 15 months in instituting this case. Learned counsel lastly submits that chargesheet in this case has already been submitted. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the state and opposite party have vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail and submit that the petitioner tried to mislead this Court by stating that the case would be compromised with Opposite Party No. 2, but no such assurance was given to the petitioner. The petitioner has been causing mental tension to the Opposite Party No. 2 by threatening her in many ways and prohibiting her to enter into the campus of Civil Court, Jamshedpur. 6. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that both the parties are major and also considering that the chargesheet has already been submitted, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his surrender and/or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera Police Station Case No.236 of 2021 (G.R. No.6 of 2023), subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his own name or in the name of his ancestors in 2025:JHHC:15232 3 which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. 7. The Trial Court is directed to ensure that within a month charge must be framed and the informant should be examined as a witness within a month thereafter. If there is any impediment from the side of this petitioner, inasmuch as if the informant is approached and/or restrained from appearing before the Court, the bail bonds of the petitioners shall be cancelled and the Trial Court shall take all coercive steps as against the petitioner for his arrest. 8. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, allowed. (Ananda Sen, J.) Prashant. Cp-3