IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1710 of 2024 ------ Md. Sajid @ Sajwa, son of Abdul Majid, aged about 49 years, resident of Ratan Myeeka Road, P.O. & P.S.-Pachamba, Dist.- Giridih … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Gaunjhu, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Saman Ahmad, Advocate : Mr. Amit Kr. Sinha, Advocate ------ Order No.13 Dated- 22.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.73 of 2023 registered under sections 448/ 354B/376/511/323/325/307/379/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner attempted to commit rape upon the informant and when she resisted the same and raised hue and cry, the son of the informant came to her rescue but the petitioner called the co-accused persons and the co- accused-Md. Farhan attempted to murder the informant causing injuries on her head. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner first instituted Panchamba P.S. Case No. 72 of 2023 and as a counter blast, this false case has been foisted. It is next submitted that, out of the six criminal cases of which there is reference in the rejection order of the anticipatory bail petition passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Giridih, the petitioner has been acquitted in three cases, and in one case, he is not an accused but in one of the cases, which is of the year 1997, he has been convicted. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the occurrence of this case took place at 09:00 am prior to the occurrence at 10:00 am of the same day in respect of which Panchamba P.S. Case No. 72 of 2023 has been registered. It is then submitted that, to set up a defence, the petitioner first reached to the police station, before the informant could reach the police station hence, the FIR of the petitioner has been instituted prior to that of the informant. It is next submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case to find out the details 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 and the criminal antecedent, 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-