IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1753 of 2025 ------ Ranjeet Ravani @ Rewani, aged about 37 years, son of Dilip Rawani, resident of Yogidih, Asansol, P.O.-Yogidih, P.S.-Siyal Jori, Dist.-Bokaro … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Informant (Victim) … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Sushma Aind, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Siyaljori P.S. Case No.39 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 376(2) (n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with this anticipatory bail application and earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn. It is then submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed rape upon the informant repeatedly. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the FIR has been lodged after six months, of the occurrence of the first commission of rape and both the petitioner and the victim are adults and resides in the same village. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that keeping in view the direct and specific allegation of commission of rape repeatedly by the petitioner upon the informant, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the requirement of custodial interrogation of the petitioner during the investigation of the case, this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-