( 2026:JHHC:26635 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 5003 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5003 of 2026 1. Smriti Ranjan Viswal @ Smrity Ranjan Bishwal @ Smruti Ranjan Biswal, aged about 57 years, S/o Dr. Trilokya Bhushan Vishwal @ Trilokya Bhushan Biswal 2. Sewta Bishwal @ Swetta Biswal @ Sweta Biswal, aged about 55 years, W/o Smriti Ranjan Viswal @ Smrity Ranjan Bishwal @ Smruti Ranjan Biswal, D/o Prafulla Kishor Kanungo, both are R/o Village- Plot No.1266/10, Sector-01, CDA, P.O. & P.S. CDA Phase 02, District- Cuttuck, Orissa … Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, Advocate Mr. Madhav Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, A.P.P. ----- 02/03.09.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.136/2017 arising out of C/1 Case No.1765/2017, registered for the offence under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the earlier complaint case was filed by the informant, which was later on converted into FIR. He further submits that Sections 82 and 83 processes have also been issued, which were challenged by the petitioners before this Court in Cr.M.P. No.3443 of 2025, which was allowed vide order dated 01.12.2025 and processes have been quashed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. He next submits that the petitioners are engaged in business of real estate, whereas, the informant is having criminal antecedent and he was trying to extort money from petitioner no.1 and when the same was resisted, the informant ( 2026:JHHC:26635 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 5003 of 2026 allegedly concocted a false and exaggerated story to save himself. He also submits that co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Cout in A.B.P. No.1018 of 2017 and A.B.P. No.1540 of 2025. He further submits that chargesheet has been submitted. 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 taking money on the ground of alluring the informant to invest the same. On these grounds, he submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Considering that the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court in the aforesaid A.B.P.s. and it has been pointed out that the informant is having criminal antecedent and he has tried to extort money from petitioner no.1 and chargesheet has also been submitted and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.136/2017 arising out of C/1 Case No.1765/2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 3rd September, 2026 Ajay/