IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 406 of 2024 ------ Mohit Kumar Agarwal, aged about 28 years, son of Kailash Kumar Agarwal, resident of Block-27, Flat -238, New B-Type Colony, Koyla Nagar, Saraidhela, P.O. –Saraidhela, P.S. – Saraidhela, District –Dhanbad, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Palak Agarwal, wife of Mohit Kumar Agrawal, daughter of Surender Agarwal, resident of No.3, Salbagan, Benachity, Durgapur, P.O. –Durgapur, P.S. –Durgapur, District – Paschim Bardhaman, West Bengal. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Sagar Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl. P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate ------ Order No.10 Dated- 22.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with C.P. Case No.9061 of 2023 filed under sections 498A/377/323/406 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the husband of the complainant-opposite party no.2 has treated the complainant-opposite party no.2 with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and the parties have decided to dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce mutually and a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed in the Family Court, Dhanbad. It is next submitted that because of some marital discord between the parties, this case has been instituted. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad, in connection with C.P. Case No.9061 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case with further condition that that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-