IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1237 of 2025 ------ Ashok Kumar, aged about 47 years, son of Shri Nehal Gope, resident of Gaushala Road, Ward No.27, P.O. Jhumri Telaiya, P.S. Telaiya, District Koderma (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Nageshwar Prasad Gupta son of Sukhilal Gupta, resident of Gayatri Niwas, Addi Bunglow, P.O. Jhumri Telaiaya, P.S.-Telaiya, District Koderma (Jharkhand). .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pandey 2, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Amrita Kumari, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21/02/2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.1001 of 2022 instituted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a broker and for selling and purchasing land entered into an agreement with the co-accused Rajeshwari Singh, the complainant paid Rs.38 lakhs to the petitioner in cash and paid Rs.20 lakhs to Rajeshwari Singh-the co-accused/owner of the land. It is next submitted that Rajeshwari Singh transferred Rs.20 Lakhs to the complainant behind his back without intimating anything by transferring the said amount to the bank account of the complainant and the petitioner also returned Rs.8 Lakhs but did not return the remaining Rs.10 Lakhs. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the complainant only made part payment out of the total consideration amount of Rs.1,15,50,000/- but refused to pay the remaining amount. It is next submitted that the dispute between the parties is basically a civil dispute and only to harass the petitioner and wrecking vengeance, this false case has been foisted claiming due of Rs.10 Lakhs. It is next submitted that a cloak of criminal case has been given to a purely civil dispute. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not disturb or annoy the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Koderma in connection with Complaint Case No.1001 of 2022 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and he will not disturb or annoy the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/