IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 524 of 2025 ------ Pritam Chakraborty, aged about 24 years, S/o Kanhai Lal, R/o Village –Gopinagar, P.O. –Gopinagar, P.S. –Manbazar, District –Purulia (West Bengal) … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Bihari Lal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kr., Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 27.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.01 of 2019 registered under sections 420/ 506/120B of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for anticipatory bail. Though earlier, the petitioner filed A.B.A. No. 2430 of 2021 but the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15.06.2021. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons was running a racket of cheating and criminal misappropriation by alluring the unemployed persons to provide them employment in Multi National Company and Rs.4,00,000/- was collected by the petitioner through his bank account which he has dishonestly misappropriated. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner was minor at the time of alleged occurrence and his parents were operating his bank account. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of defrauding gullible unemployed persons of huge amount of money, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation of the case for recovery of the defrauded amount. It is then submitted that though the petitioner withdrew his anticipatory bail application way back in the year 2021 but still he is absconding and is not cooperating with the police for investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case as also his conduct of absconding for over three years after withdrawal of his anticipatory bail application, this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-