2026:JHHC:16981 --1-- A.B.A. No. 3053 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3053 of 2026 ---- 1. Arun Kumar Tiwary, aged about 58 years, S/o Kishore Tiwari, R/o Shivpuri Colony, H. No.295, Bara Gamharia, PO – Gamharia, PS – Adityapur Gamharia, District – Seraikela Kharsawan, Jharkhand 2. Saraswati Devi @ Sarswati Devi, aged about 53 years, W/o Arun Kumar, Tiwary, R/o Shivpuri Colony, H. No.295, Gamharia, PO – Gamharia, PS – Adityapur, District – Seraikela Kharsawan, Jharkhand .... Petitioners -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioners :- Mr. Vishal Kr. Trivedi, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Advocate ---- 02/12.06.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.90 of 2020, for the alleged offences registered under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned J.M., Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that for the alleged allegation the FIR has been lodged after delay of three years. He further submits that allegation regarding the petitioners’ company account being in grave danger of being declared as Non-Performing Asset (N.P.A.) is even otherwise 2026:JHHC:16981 --2-- A.B.A. No. 3053 of 2026 misconceived and does not in any manner establish any criminal intent or involvement of the petitioners in the alleged transaction. He then submits that the petitioners never approached or requested the informant or any bank officials for any kind of undue favour, illegal assistance or arrangement to overcome such financial situation. He next submits that the bank officials have approached the informant as their service was at stake and they have requested to deposit the amount in the account of the petitioners’ company for enhancing the credit limit of the petitioners’ company. He also submits that the bank officials have already been granted anticipatory bail by learned Judicial Commissioner. He next submits that the petitioners have settled certain account out of one-time settlement arrangement and for certain account negotiations are going on. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of depositing the amount in the account of the petitioners’ company. 5. In the FIR itself it has been stated that the bank officials have gone to the informant and requested to deposit the amount in the account of the company of the petitioners as there was likelihood to declare the said account as Non-Performing Asset and the bank officials have already been granted anticipatory bail by learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi. It has been pointed out that 2026:JHHC:16981 --3-- A.B.A. No. 3053 of 2026 out of one-time settlement certain accounts have been settled by the petitioners with the bank and for certain accounts negotiations with the banks are going on. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, I am inclined to provide anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of their surrender/arrest, the petitioners, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.M., Ranchi in connection with Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.90 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 12.06.2026 Sangam/