IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1823 of 2025 ------ Sanjib Kumar De, aged about 53 years, S/o Adhir Kumar De, resident of 11 Ambagan, P.O. –Bansdroni, P.S. –Regent Park, District –South Kolkata, West Bengal … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Mahua Banerjee, aged about 55 years old, W/o Bidyut Banerjee, D/o Radha Nath Goswami, R/o Pal Bagan Mihijam, P.O. and P.S. –Mihijam, District –Jamtara, Jharkhand. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 25.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with P.C.R. Case No.709 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/504 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner took the land of the complainant to construct a multistoried building with the promise to give three flats, two parking space and two shops in the said multistoried building to the complainant but after construction of the same, did not give the same to the complainant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and are general and omnibus in nature. The complainant has already filed Consumer Case No. 5 of 2020 before the District Consumer Forum, Jamtara but the same was later on withdrawn. It is next submitted that the dispute between the parties is basically a civil dispute. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the complainant or his family members 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. 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 depositing cash security of Rs.25,000/- 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 Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Jamtara, in connection with P.C.R. Case No.709 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 complainant or his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-