2025:JHHC:17761 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1467 of 2025 ------ Sumit Kumar Singh @ Sumit Singh, S/o Jagdish Singh, R/o near Shiv Mandir, Namkum Bazar, Tata Road, PO and PS Namkum, District Ranchi … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Informant, R/o Dr. Fatehulla Main Road, PO and PS Lower Bazar, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Poddar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P. ----- 04/ 03.07.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences registered under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/109(1)/ 351(3)/352/75(2)/74 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the court of Learned JMFC XVI, Ranchi in connection with Ormanjhi PS Case No. 204 of 2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire allegation is false. There is nothing to suggest that this petitioner has assaulted the victim girl. He further submits that in fact the victim girl fell down while coming out from the restaurant and got herself injured as a result of which this case has been lodged with malafide intention. 4. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the victim’s statement has been recorded in the case-diary wherein she has specifically stated that it is this petitioner who has assaulted her and there are injuries also. He lastly submits that in paragraph no. 95 of the case-diary it has been mentioned that there are five criminal cases against this petitioner. Details of which are as follows: 2025:JHHC:17761 2 (i) Namkum PS Case No. 101 of 2022. (ii) Namkum PS Case No.211 of 2022. (iii) Namkum PS Case No.309 of 2022. (iv) Namkum PS Case No.310 of 2022. (v) Namkum PS Case No.28 of 2023. 5. Considering the fact that there is direct allegation against this petitioner and the fact that there are five other criminal cases pending against this petitioner, this Court finds it not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3