2025:JHHC:13968 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5941 of 2024 Rajnish Kumar Singh @ Rajnish Singh @ Rajesh Singh, S/o late Vijayeshwar Prasad Singh, R/o MA-62, Housing Colony, Adityapur, Post Adityapur, PS Adityapur, District: Seraikella Kharsawan …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Manish Kumar Singh, S/o late Vijayeshwar Prasad Singh, an OCI, overseas citizen of India at present R/o 296A, Aliiolani St. Pukalani HI 96768, United States. …. Opposite Party(s) With A.B.A. No. 6688 of 2024 Dipak Ranjan @ Deepak Ranjan, S/o Braj Kishore Singh, R/o Duplex No.01, 2nd Phase, Syndicate Colony, Uliyan, Kadma Town, Jamshedpur, Post Kadma, PS: Kadma, PUMPS Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Manish Kumar Singh, S/o late Vijayeshwar Prasad Singh, an OCI, overseas citizen of India at present R/o 296A, Aliiolani St. Pukalani HI 96768, United States. …. Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K.Mahto, APP For the OP No.2 : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate ----- 03/08.05.2025: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned counsel for the State. 2. These are applications filed by the petitioners praying for grant of anticipatory bail in terms of sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the petitioners have been allegedly implicated in connection with Adityapur PS case no. 176 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420,467, 468, 470, 471 and 506 /34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned CJM at Seraikella. 3. The informant alleges that the petitioner in ABA No. 5941 of 2024 has acted beyond the power of attorney and also entered into an agreement with a builder who is petitioner in ABA No. 6688 of 2024. Thus, he has acted against the interest of the informant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute is civil in nature and the fact that power of attorney was given to the petitioner in ABA No. 5941 2025:JHHC:13968 of 2024 is not disputed. The power of attorney gives power to the petitioner to sell the land and the petitioner has only entered into a development agreement of the land. He has further submitted that power of attorney has now been revoked also. 5. The petitioner in ABA No. 6688 of 2024 is a builder. He submits that he cannot be made a party to the family dispute. He has not cheated any one and also no forgery has been committed by him. He has only complied with the terms and conditions of the agreement. 6. The learned APP and the learned counsel for the OP No.2 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. 7. The learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner in ABA No. 5941 of 2024 in connivance with the petitioner in ABA No. 6688 of 2024 has entered into an agreement and they are acting against the interest of the informant. He admits that there is dispute in respect of power of attorney but the same has now been revoked. 8. There is a power of attorney in which the informant has given some power to the petitioner in ABA No. 5941 of 2024 who is none but his brother. As per power of attorney, this petitioner has power to sell the property and execute sale deed also. The petitioner entered into development agreement which the informant claims is against the interest of the informant. 9. Considering the aforesaid allegation, I find that the dispute is prima facie civil in nature, thus I am inclined to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and in the event of their surrender/arrest the learned court below is directed to enlarge them on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM at Seraikella, in connection with Adityapur PS case no. 176 of 2023, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be close relative of the petitioners and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his/ her name or in the name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the learned trial court indicating his /her share in the property. (ANANDA SEN, J. ) KNR/