( 2026:JHHC:25297 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 4778 of 2026 Debasis Sharma @ Devashish Sharma, aged about 42 years, son of Sunil Sharma, resident of Plot No. 304, Manmohan Cooperative, P.O. and P.S. Sector 12, District-Bokaro, Jharkhand ...... … Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Pankaj Kumar Verma, son of late Bindeshwari Prasad Verma @ Vindeshwari Praad Verma, resident of House No. 194A, Sonatand, P.O. Sivandih, P.S. Marafari, District-Bokaro, Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Parties -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P. 02/ 21.08.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Marafari P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026, registered under sections 318(4) of BNS, 2023, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M, Bokaro. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the transaction between the petitioner and the informant was a bona fide commercial transaction reduced into a written and signed agreement dated 10.04.2021 whereby the informant voluntarily agreed to sell his vehicle to the petitioner against the petitioner’s undertaking to discharge the outstanding loan liability of the vehicle. He further submits that false allegations have been made that the petitioner is using the said vehicle without paying the amount. He next submits that petitioner was already paying the amount on the monthly basis in cash to the informant and it is alleged that since last four years the petitioner was using the vehicle and after four years the F.I.R has been lodged. He next submits that dispute is commercial in nature however criminal colour has been given. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. ( 2026:JHHC:25297 ) 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that allegations are there of not paying the amount of the vehicle. 5. Considering that there is dispute with regard to non payment of EMI to the informant and in the light of agreement prima facie it transpires that the vehicle was handed over to the petitioner to use and it has been pointed out that petitioner was paying the EMI to the informant and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the above named, petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M, Bokaro, in connection with Marafari P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023. Dt.21.08.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-