2025:JHHC:16110 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6670 of 2024 ------ Dilip Ram S/o Late Gouri Das R/o Bartar Basti, P.O.,P.S. & District Dhanbad. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kalyan Banerjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. ---- 04/ 16.06.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 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 Kenduadih (Gondudih) P.S. Case No. 49 of 2024, for offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The case is presently pending before the Court of J.M.F.C. Dhanbad. 3. The allegations in the First Information Report revolve around cheating of Rs.39 lakh by the petitioners and others from the informant and others in lieu of offering employment. As per the First Information Report, the informant and his brother in need of employment fell in trap of Appu Das, who with the help of this petitioner and others allured the informant and others to pay the aforesaid money. They at different point of time took money from them on the pretext of medical and document verification. The specific allegation against this petitioner in the First Information Report is that he along with others had accepted a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- each from Mahesh Kumar Das, Tinku Kumar Das and Nishant Kumar Das. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner in the entire first information report save and except that the petitioner also worked with the officer of Appu Das. The entire allegations revolve around Appu Das. It is only due to some past differences with the informant’s father, the name of the petitioner has been dragged by the informant. 5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. He submits that there is specific allegation that Appu Das alongwith others including this petitioner had 2025:JHHC:16110 -: 2 :- accepted a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- each from the informant and other persons. Further, there is also an allegation of using false emails, whatsapp and phone calls and creating false documents to cheat the informant and others. 6. From the allegations in the First Information Report, I find that this is a case where the petitioner and others have taken huge money illegally on the pretext of offering appointment. This allegation needs investigation and interrogations. Considering the said facts, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. 7. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-03