2025:JHHC:12873 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5704 of 2024 ------ Shankar Yadav, aged about 44 years, son of late Darshan Yadav, resident of village & P.O.-Dhauthawa, P.S.-Katkamsandi, District- Hazaribag, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P. ----- 06/ 30.04.2025 1. Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences under Sections 376, 417, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. As per the allegations made in the FIR, son of the petitioner was having some affair with the victim girl and physical relationship was established. At the intervention of the panchayat, the marriage was fixed. Dowry was also taken by this petitioner who happens to be the father of the boy. Thereafter, just soon before the marriage could be solemnized, it is alleged that the marriage was cancelled at the instance of this petitioner and others which led to filing of this case. 4. After going through the impugned order, I find that there is an allegation that this petitioner has taken three lakhs rupees as dowry but later on, did not agree to solemnize the marriage of his son with the daughter of the informant. 5. Further, from the impugned order and the statement of the witnesses recorded in paragraph 21, 25, 26, 34, 35, 36, 46, 47 2025:JHHC:12873 2 of the supplementary case diary, it is clear that a sum of Rs. 85,000/- was received by this petitioner and also from paragraph 52 of the supplementary case diary, it is evident that the amount has been returned at the intervention of the Panchayat. 6. The aforesaid fact is reflected in the impugned order itself as a finding of the learned Special Judge POCSO ACT. 7. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 8. Considering the aforesaid nature of allegation and the fact that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he has received 85,000/- Rs. and, thereafter, refused to marry his son with the victim and also the fact that he has returned the money, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of his surrender 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 learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chatra, in connection with POCSO Case NO. 30/2023, arising out of Itkhori P.S. Case NO. 29/2023, 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 name or in the name of his ancestors in 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. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Rashmi/ Cp-2