IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2782 of 2024 ------ 1. Meena Devi, aged about 40 years, wife of Dilip Mehra 2. Ramesh Das @ Ramesh Mehra, aged about 19 years, son of Dilip Mehra Both above are resident of Village-Sirsa, P.O.-Sirsa, P.S.- Pathrol, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party With A.B.A. No. 2809 of 2024 ------ 1. Dilip Mehra, aged about 50 years, son of Lakhindar Mehra 2. Panchu Mehra, aged about 32 years, son of Lakhindar Mehra Both above are resident of Village-Sirsa, P.O.-Sirsa, P.S.- Pathrol, Dist.-Deoghar, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, Addl. P.P. : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.09 Dated- 16.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Pathrol P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 registered under sections 147/ 148/353/341/307/225 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being members of an unlawful assembly, in prosecution of the common object of the assembly attempted to murder the police personnel who went to the place of occurrence on receiving the information that the petitioners have assembled to commit cybercrime. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 12 of the anticipatory bail applications and they are ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs. 25,000/- each and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Madhupur, in connection with Pathrol P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-