2025:JHHC:13963 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.6338 of 2024 ------ Md. Tamizuddin @ Muhammad Tameez @ Md. Tameez, son of late Md. Ajamat @ Md. Ajmal, R/o Village Parsa, P.O. Parsa, P.S. Hanwara, District Godda. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Victim … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Md. Faiyaz Alam, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl. P.P. Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate ----- 07/ 08.05.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.96 of 2024, for offences under Sections 376, 379 and 506 IPC. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge-III-cum-Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Godda. 3. Learned A.P.P. representing the State and learned counsel representing O.P. No.2 oppose the anticipatory bail application. 4. The allegation levelled against the petitioner on the basis of complaint case is that when the victim was in her house, this petitioner Md. Tameez came and forcibly dragged the complainant inside a room by holding her hair and committed rape upon her and recorded obscene videos of her. 5. After investigation, the petitioner was exonerated, as the final form was filed in favour of the petitioner. 6. Thereafter, the informant filed a protest petition and on 2025:JHHC:13963 2 protest, cognizance has been taken. 7. Admitted fact is that in this case on protest, cognizance has been taken. Thus, no useful purpose would be served to keep the petitioner in custody as there is no occasion for investigation. 8. Also, in a complaint case, there is no question of custodial interrogation. The only fact which the Court has to be assured of is whether the accused will face the trial or not or whether there is any chance of tampering with the evidence. 9. Since the cognizance has already been taken in this case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned, who will pass appropriate order in terms of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 10. With the aforesaid observation, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3