2026:JHHC:17522 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 1605 of 2026 ---- Satish Oraon, aged about 22 years, son of Lachhu Oraon, resident of Village Bagru Hill, PO and PS Bagru, District Lohardaga .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwari, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :- Mr. Kumar Nilesh, Advocate ---- 2/17.06.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bagru PS Case No.25 of 2025, for offence registered under section 108 of BNS, 2023, pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and abatement to suicide allegation is made against the petitioner and he next submits that the petitioner has only refused to marry with the deceased and thereafter she has committed suicide and even there is no suicidal note and in view of that, he submits that anticipatory bail to the petitioner may kindly be granted. 4. Learned State counsel as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant jointly oppose the prayer and 2026:JHHC:17522 2 submit that the petitioner has instigated the deceased to take such step and in view of that, the petitioner’s involvement is there and as such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner may kindly be rejected. 5. In the FIR it has come that the petitioner was in relationship with the deceased since last three years and has also established physical relationship and thereafter he has refused to marry with the deceased and pursuant to that, she has committed suicide. 6. There is sufficient cause to suggest that this petitioner has instigated the deceased to take such step as he has established physical relationship with the deceased and thereafter he has refused to marry with the deceased, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the present case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected, and consequently this anticipatory bail application being A.B.A.No.1605 of 2026 is, hereby, dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 17.06.2026 SI/