2025:JHHC:19195 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3708 of 2025 ------ 1. Upendra Sao @ Upendra Kumar Sao, aged about 46 years, S/o Suresh Sao. 2. Dhruv Kumar, aged about 26 years, S/o Upendra Sao @ Upendra Kumar Sao, Both are R/o Village- Khijuri, P.O. & P.S. Tisri, District- Giridih (Jharkhand) … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Md. Ayub Ansari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl. PP ----- 05/ 15.07.2025 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court fees has already been deposited and the other defect(s), if any, stands ignored. 2. Heard the parties. 3. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 & 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences under Sections 47(a)/47(c)/55 of Excise Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cognizance of offence has already been taken. Though there is allegation that 11,480.00 liters of illegal spirit were recovered from the house of this petitioner but the entire allegation is absolutely false. It is submitted that the petitioners’ vehicle was given on hire in the office of the concerned B.D.O. who had conducted raid. The B.D.O. was not paying the hire charge of the vehicle and the petitioner had made complaint to the higher official. He submits by referring Annexure-2 that a direction was given to look into the matter, thus, being enraged, this false case has been lodged. He lastly submits that just a day prior to the occurrence, from the same area, huge quantity of illicit liquor was recovered nearly of similar quantity but the prosecution report in that case was lodged after the prosecution report of these petitioners which suggests 2025:JHHC:19195 2 that the petitioners have been framed in this case. 5. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that huge quantity was recovered from the possession of these petitioners. 6. After hearing the parties, I find that there is documents which suggests that hire charge of the vehicle of the petitioners was not being paid by the B.D.O. for which direction was given to look into the matter. Further, cognizance has already been taken in this case. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of their surrender or arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Giridih in connection with Complaint Case No.3190/2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioners and he should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which they are having share and to that effect, they have to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. With a further condition that they will file an affidavit stating that they will appear before the trial Court as and when required and will cooperate in the trial and will not delay the same. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Sandeep. Cp-3