( 2025:JHHC:33371 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3275 of 2024 ------ Sanskriti Kumari aged about 33 years, D/o Sri Ganesh Choudhary, W/o Sri Arun Kumar, Resident of House No.23, Moti Nagar, Karmik Nagar, P.O.-I.S.M., P.S.-Saraidhela, District-Dhanbad. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Arun Kumar S/o Sri Ramnakshtra Yadav, resident of village- Bhalobasa, Apartment, Flat No.21, Ruby Park East, P.O.-Haltu, P.S.-Kasba Bhalupara, District-Kolkata (W.B.), presently Chief Manager, MSTC Limited, BSNL Exchange Building Beltola Basistha Road, Wireless, P.O. & P.S.-Hatigaon, District-Guwahati (Assam), PIN-781038. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Saibal Kr. Laik, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P. For the OP 2 : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate ------ Order No:-05 Dated:-07-11-2025 Heard the parties. This Cr.M.P. has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 483(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 for cancellation of bail granted to the opposite party no.2 in terms of the order dated 27.09.2023 passed by this Court in A.B.A. No.6734 of 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party no.2 was given the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 27.09.2023 in A.B.A. No.6734 of 2023 on the condition that he will resume conjugal life with the petitioner as and when the petitioner joins him for resuming the conjugal life and keep and maintain the petitioner with full honor and dignity as his lawful wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that on 22.11.2023, the opposite party no.2 surrendered before the trial Court and granted anticipatory bail. It is next submitted that the opposite party no.2 went to the house of the petitioner and took the petitioner to Dhanbad Railway Station and took her to Siwan. It is next submitted that on 29.11.2023, the opposite party no.2 along with parents and complainant/petitioner went to Guwahati where the accused lives and works. It is next submitted that the accused persons of the case do not take proper care of the petitioner and inflict torture both mentally and physically. It is next submitted that while the petitioner stayed in Guwahati, the petitioner pleaded the accused person to send her back to Dhanbad but the accused person did not pay any heed to her request. It is next submitted that the father of the petitioner arranged a flight ticket and the petitioner came back to Dhanbad and was treated by a doctor and the petitioner lodged a complaint in Hatigaon Police Station on 03.12.2023, hence, it is submitted that the bail granted to the opposite party no.2 be cancelled. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false and only because the petitioner is not ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the opposite party no.2, hence, this false and frivolous petition has been filed only to harass the opposite party no.2. On being asked by the Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner at present is not ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the opposite party no.2. Considering the facts of the case, as the petitioner is not ready and willing to resume conjugal life with the opposite party no.2 anymore and there is no allegation against the opposite party no.2 of tampering with evidence or absconding and the allegation of ill treatment of the petitioner at Guwahati is not of any serious nature and the fact that the opposite party no.2 is still staying in Guwahati; whereas the trial is going on at Dhanbad, hence, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to cancel the bail granted to the opposite party no.2 in terms of the order dated 27.09.2023 passed by this Court in A.B.A. No.6734 of 2023 in the facts of the case. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 07/11/2025 Abhiraj/