2026:JHHC:3216 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.7009 of 2025 Shailendra Kumar @ Sikander Thakur @ Shailendra Thakur, Aged about- 40 Years, Son of Dayanand Thakur, Resident of Mohalla Chhota Nimdih, Chaibasa, P.O. – Chaibasa, P.S. Chaibasa Sadar, District-West Singhbhum, Jharkhand …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. XXX … Opp. Parties -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. Choubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate ------ 2/06.02.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No. 77/2025, registered under section 376/504/506/509 of Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned C.J.M. West Singhbhum, Chaibasa. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation in the FIR is there of establishing relationship on the pretext of false marriage and they were in relationship since 7/8/2023, wherein the FIR has been lodged on 25th September 2025. He next submits that prior of the lodging of the present case, the informant has lodged, an FIR against the sister of this petitioner namely Sulochna Thakur @ Baby Thakur on 01.03.2024 and the sister of the informant has also lodged the case against the informant and two others in the year 2024 being Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No.23 of 2024 and the case is pending. He next submits that what has happened, that was consensual in nature. In that view of the matter, the anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and 2026:JHHC:3216 2 submits that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and the dignity of the woman has been taken away by saying many things in public. She also submits that in that view of the matter, the anticipatory bail may kindly not be allowed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that with regard to the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the informant has lodged the case against the sister of the petitioner, that allegation is also there against the petitioner and there are case and counter case for that incident. He submits that the serious allegations are there in the FIR, in view of that, anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 6. Looking into the contents of the FIR, it transpires that there are serious allegations against the petitioner of saying many things, which is not expected to disclose at public. The allegations are also there of threatening to make the intimate video viral. If a person is in friendship, it is not expected to exploit the others vulnerability and dignity and the other witnesses have also supported the case in the case diary. 7. In view of that, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. 8. This petition is hereby rejected and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 06.02.2026 R.Kumar