IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No. 1030 of 2025 Shankar Singh, aged about 38 years, son fo late Jagdish Singh, resident of village- Hurdag, Tola- Chirodih, P.O. & P.S.- Garu, Dist.- Latehar … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim , W/o ‘X’, R/o vill- ‘Y’, P.O. & P.S.- Z, Dist.- Latehar … opp. parties Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar , Adv. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla , Addl.. PP For the opp. party no. 2 : Mr. Sudharshan Singh , Adv. 03 / 24.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Garu P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 registered under Sections 70 (1), 351 (2) of BNS, 2023. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed gang rape upon the victim. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It is jointly submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 drawing attention of the court to the IA no. 3203 of 2025 which is supported by the separate affidavits of the pairvikar of the petitioner as well as the informant – opp. party no. 2 that there, it has categorically been mentioned that the matter has been compromised between the parties and the informant does not want to proceed with the case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is delay of more than one month and three days in lodging the FIR and because of the land dispute between the parties, this false case been foisted against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the dispute between the parties is at best a civil dispute and they undertake not to annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during pendency of the case hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 10,000/- as cash security and 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 ACJM, Latehar in connection with Garu P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 subject to the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during pendency of the case and will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile phone number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. In view of the above, IA no. 3203 of 2025 stands disposed of accordingly. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-