IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.9607 of 2022 ------ Abdul Rahman @ Md. Abdul Rahman .... .... ….Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Another .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, Addl.P.P. For the OP : Mr. Vinay Kr. Tiwary, Advocate ------ Order No.10 Dated- 08-01-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Godda (Town) P.S. Case No.248 of 2021 registered under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape upon the victim/complainant and subsequently married her but later on thrown her out from her house and treated her with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the FIR has not been registered for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that investigation of the case is going on and in view of direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the complainant, the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code can be added at the time of submission of charge sheet, hence, in view of serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, the petitioner ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the complainant which cannot be compounded only by subsequent marriage of the petitioner with the complainant, this Court is not inclined to give the privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/