[2026:JHHC:2848] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 600 of 2026 Tuntun Barnwal, son of Satyanarayan Modi, aged about 31 years, resident Moriyanwan, P.O. and P.S.- Jhumri Telaiya, District-Koderma, Jharkhand. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Azeemuddin, Advocate. ------ 05/ 03.02.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Koderma P.S. Case No. 38 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 85, 89, 109(1), 74, 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner happened to be the husband of the informant. He next submits that prior to lodging of the present FIR, the petitioner himself was assaulted, wrongfully confined, beaten mercilessly and looted by the informant's family members at Village Sonedih Debua, P.S. Markacho, on 05.11.2025, when the petitioner had gone there for reconciliation. He then submits that in the said incident, the petitioner was wrongfully restrained and confined in a room and beaten with fists and kicks by multiple persons along with his in-law's family- members and looted Rs. 47,300/- in cash, gold necklace and mobile phone and later on his mobile phone was recovered in broken condition after police intervention, and when the petitioner made call-request over number-112 on 05.11.2025 (Wednesday) bearing ID No. 427250 and [2026:JHHC:2848] -2- thereafter the petitioner was rescued by the police from the alleged place and somehow, he was saved. He further submits that the petitioner has paid certain money, which has been disclosed in para-19 of the petition. He also submits that the marriage was solemnized without taking any dowry by the family of the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant jointly opposed the prayer and submit that the petitioner happened to be the husband of the informant and allegations of torture is there. Learned counsel appearing for the informant further adds that the allegations are there that after taking Rs. 29 lakhs, the marriage was solemnized and the dispute arose in the marital life when a female child has born out of their wedlock. 5. In view of the above, it transpires that the petitioner happened to be the husband of the informant and it has been disclosed in para-6 of the petition that prior to lodging of the present case, how the petitioner has been mishandled and after intervention of the police, the petitioner has been rescued and further the petitioner has paid certain money to the informant and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-19 of the petition, as such, the petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-03.02.2026 Amitesh/-