2025:JHHC:16821 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6917 of 2024 ---- Vikram Singh, S/o Prayag Singh, R/o 236/1 Dhandera Milapanagar, Roorkee, P.O. & P.S. Roorkee, Dist Haridwar (Uttrakhand). … ... Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Somnath Jha, S/o Late Jaydev Jha, R/o LIG, Housing Colony, P.O. + P.S. Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad. … … Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner: Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate ---- 05/ 25.06.2025 The present anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been preferred by the peti- tioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad Police Station Case No.81 of 2024, registered for the offences alleged under Sections 420, 406, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. 2. The prosecution case is based on a written complaint by the informant. It has been alleged that informant’s daughter became close to petitioner, a fellow student, who allegedly promised to marry her and induced her to give him Rs.5,00,000 and a car. Later, both families agreed to the marriage, and the informant cleared a Rs.7,00,000 car loan. Petition’s parents visited Dhanbad, and demands for dowry followed. Under pressure, the informant mortgaged gold to raise Rs.21,00,000 and handed it to the accused, with witnesses present. Despite booking a wedding venue, the petitioner kept postponing the marriage and eventually petitioner married someone else on 02.01.2024. Informant was abused and threatened when he confronted them and alleges a total fraud of Rs.25,00,000. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has duly complied with the notice issued to him under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. He submitted that the petitioner is co-operating with the investigation and there is no necessity to arrest him. He argued that the ingredients in the First Information Report do not attract the offences alleged under the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. He contended that the petitioner and the informant’s daughter are good friends and the informant himself wanted her 2025:JHHC:16821 -: 2 :- daughter to get married with the petitioner. Thus, on these aforesaid grounds he prayed that the instant anticipatory bail should be allowed. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State as also the counsel appearing for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. They submitted that the petitioner on the pretext of marriage, cheated the informant’s daughter. They argued that there are enough material on record to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. 5. In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, I have gone through the available records and the case diary. I find that the allegation against the petitioner is that he had accepted money on the pretext of marriage. The offence alleged is under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, which punishable for less than 7 (seven) years. It has also come that the petitioner has always cooperated and joined the investigation. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad Police Station Case No.81 of 2024, 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 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. 7. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, allowed. (Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-03