THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1720 of 2025 ------ Santosh Sisodia @ Santosh Sisodiya, aged about 49 years, s/o Sadanand Singh, r/o Anu Kunj, Anandgarh Colony, Tilkamanjhi Jagdishpur PO & PS Jadishpur, Dist. Bhagalpur, Bihar .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Md. Iqbal @ Md. Equbal, s/o late Abdul Rahman, r/o Noor Nagar, Purani Ranchi, PO head Post Office, Ranchi, PS Kotwali, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : M/s. Sanjay Kumar & Sanjeev Kr. Singh, Advocates For the State : Mr. P.D Agrawal, Spl PP ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18-03-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 819 of 2019 registered under Sections 406, 420, 427, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the complainant along with the Naushad Alam entered into an agreement, with the petitioner for purchase of land, of an area of 2 Acres and paid Rs. 35,00,000/- to the accused persons of the case and after payment, the complainant and his partner, Naushad constructed office over 3 decimals of land, but accused persons, of the case, damaged the office, took away tables, laptops, computers and others articles, causing loss of Rs. 17,00,000/- to the complainant. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that this case has been lodged to pressurize and blackmail the petitioner. It is next submitted that Naushad Alam gave two cheques to the petitioner amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- and both the cheques got dishonored, hence, the petitioner filed the Complaint Case -2- No. 4806 of 2017 involving the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act against Naushad Alam, after which, Naushad Alam, settled the matter with the petitioner and the complainant is in no way concerned, with the agreement between the petitioner and Naushad Alam. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent which is evident from para 13 of this anticipatory bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail 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 CJM, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 819 of 2019 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 482 of BNS, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anjali/