Abhishek Bhardwaj Vs the State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:19159

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2511 of 2026

------

Abhishek Bhardwaj, aged about 25 years, son of Chandan Kumar Thakur, resident of Plot No.126, Lohanchal Colony, P.O. and P.S. Sector 12 (Bokaro), District Bokaro .... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Gajendra Kumar, Advocate Ms. Amrita Kumari, Advocate Ms. Sulekha Sharma, Advocate

¶9

------

¶10

02/01.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

¶11

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Baghmara (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026, registered for the offence under Section 69 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the FIR itself, it has been stated that for the marriage of the victim, the mother of the victim was searching a good boy and finally on the website of Jeevansathi.com, the petitioner was found to be a suitable person and thereafter, they have come into contact. He submits that the allegations are made against the petitioner of establishing relationship on the false pretext of marriage. He further submits that the allegations are made in the later part of the FIR that the petitioner has served a drink and thereafter, she was not found in good mind and thereafter, the petitioner has established relationship. He next submits that the allegations are further made that said alleged occurrence has taken place in the house of one of friends of the petitioner at Greater Noida. He next submits that the police has called three of the friends of this petitioner and they have been examined under Section 180 of the BNSS and their statement are part in

¶13

¶14

2026:JHHC:19159

¶15

the case diary and not supported the version of the victim. He also submits that re-statement of the victim was taken by the police and that is also part of the case diary where she has improved the case by way of saying that in the drink, some toxic substance was mixed-up. He further submits that even the police has requested the victim for medical checkup, but she has refused on the pretext that her lawyer has advised not to go for medical check-up and that has come in paragraph 16 of the case diary. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the allegations are there of establishing relationship on the pretext of marriage.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail and submits that prior to that also, the petitioner and victim have met and whenever the petitioner has tried to establish relationship, she has refused. He next submits that by way of serving the drink when she was not in good mind, physical relationship was established and only on that moment, she has surrendered. He submits that there are direct allegation against the petitioner and in view of that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.

¶18

On perusal of the FIR, it transpires that the victim is aged about 23 years. In the FIR itself, it has been stated that the mother was searching a good boy for marriage of the victim and finally on the website of Jeevansathi.com, she has found this petitioner as a suitable person for marriage with the victim. Thereafter, they started talking on mobile and further met at Ujjain and even stayed in one room in a Hotel. The allegations are made that in the house of friend of this petitioner on 30.12.2025, by way of serving the drink, she became unconscious and thereafter, relationship was established. In the re-statement before the police, she has improved the said version by way of saying that toxic substance was mixed-up in the drink. The friends of this petitioner have been examined under Section 180 of the BNSS and they have stated that

¶19

¶20

2026:JHHC:19159

¶21

nothing has occurred as alleged in the FIR. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within two weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, in connection with Baghmara (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶22

Dated 01.07.2026 Anit

¶23

Uploaded 03.07.2026

¶24

Abhishek Bhardwaj v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Bhardwaj v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajen Karmakar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surendra Kumar Murmu @ Surendra Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Devanand Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Tejasvi Kumar Pandey@ Tejaswee Kumar Pandey Vs State of Jharkhand

Shashi Kant Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Banshi Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand