( 2025:JHHC:30773 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 5824 of 2025 1. Manish Kumar, aged about 23 years, son of late Sarweshwar Mahto, resident of village Korche, P.O. Korche and P.S. Rajrappa, District- Ramgarh, Jharkhand 2. Surendra Mahto, aged about 56 years, son of Minu Mahato, resident of village Madagi, P.O. Honhe and P.S. Rajrappa, District-Ramgarh, Jharkhand 3. Sudha Devi @ Kumari Sudha Rani, aged about 43 years, wife of Surendra Mahto, resident of village Madagi, P.o. Honhe and P.S. Rajrappa, District-Ramgarh, Jharkhand ...... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners :Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha (4), Advocate Mr. Arya Kumar, Advocate Mr. Manish Kr. Paswan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Ashish Gautam, Advocate 04/ 06.10.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mahuwatand P.S. Case No. 24 of 2025, registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 318 (3), 352, 351 (2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bermo at Tenughat. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is younger brother, petitioner no.2 is brother-in-law, petitioner no.3 is sister of the groom and allegations are made that marriage was not solemnized after fixing the date of marriage. He further submits that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been returned by the family of the petitioners. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioners may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of not solemnizing marriage after fixing the date ( 2025:JHHC:30773 ) for the same. 5. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer and submits that marriage has been refused and rest of the amount has not been returned and only Rs. 1,00,000/- has been returned. 6. Considering that petitioner no.1 is younger brother, petitioner no.2 is brother-in-law, petitioner no.3 is sister of the groom and allegations are made that marriage was not solemnized after fixing the date of marriage. It has been pointed out that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been returned by the family of the petitioners. Before solemnization of marriage, break has been made. 7. I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the above named, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bermo at Tenughat, in connection with Mahuwatand P.S. Case No. 24 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.06.10.2025 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-