2025:JHHC:17709 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1309 of 2025 ---- Md. Taha, aged about 30 Years, S/o Nisar Ahmad, R/O S-8, Deco Pvt. Ltd, Kaliapani, Jajapur, P.O. & P.S. Kaliapani, District Jajapur, Orissa … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Faiz Ur Rahman, Advocate Ms. Sushma Aind, Advocate ---- 03/ 03.07.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The present anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Hindpiri Police Station Case No. 166 of 2023, registered for the offences alleged under sections 498A, 420 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, presently pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi,. 3. The allegations levelled against the petitioner is that the informant married the petitioner on 19.11.2022 and went to her matrimonial home the next day. Her family gave the petitioner a Maruti Celerio car, gold and silver jewelry, household items, and Rs.5,00,000/-. The informant claims that the petitioner didn’t take her to Indore where he worked and she was assaulted by his family members. The informant left her matrimonial house on 08.12.2022 but later returned. On 26.02.2023, she went to Indore with the petitioner, where she was assaulted and she found out that he was having an affair. When she confronted him, she was assaulted by the petitioner again and the petitioner also demanded Rs.5,00,000/- and a car. The informant’s father sent Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner. On 21.10.2023 she went to her matrimonial home where her mother-in-law demanded dowry and threatened that the petitioner would remarry if demands were not met. Later, the informant found out that the petitioner had gone to Dubai without informing her. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent, he has committed no offence, and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no material against the petitioner and the allegations made in the First Information Report are vague. He also submits that the petitioner has never 2025:JHHC:17709 -: 2 :- demanded dowry or mistreated the informant. The informant has made false claims to implicate the petitioner. He further submits that the informant wanted the petitioner to leave his job and settle in Ranchi which led to disagreement and conflicts between them. He further submits that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated due to personal disputes. 5. Learned APP appearing for the State as also the counsel appearing for the informant oppose the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the informant was tortured by the petitioner and her in-laws for demand of dowry. He further submits that after assaulting the informant, the petitioner demanded Rs.5,00,000/- and a car from the informant and her mother-in-law threatened that the petitioner would remarry if demands were not fulfilled. He lastly submits that there is every likelihood that the petitioner will not face trial as he is in Dubai. 6. After hearing the parties, and perusing the materials available on record, it appears that there is a matrimonial dispute between the parties. There was a personal dispute between the parties due to the job of the petitioner. The informant wanted the petitioner to settle in Ranchi which caused conflict between the parties. 7. In view of the nature of allegations and the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to allow this Anticipatory Bail Application. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned Court below and in the event of his surrender or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, in connection with Hindpiri Police Station Case No. 166 of 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioner will deposit his passport before the Court concerned at the time of filing of the bail bond, which will be kept in the custody of the Court and with a further condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his/her name or in the name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his/her share in the property. It is further made clear that the petitioner should cooperate in the investigation of the case and should appear before the Investigating Officer once in every 15 days till submission of the chargesheet. 8. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, allowed. (Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-03