2025:JHHC:29421-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A. (DB) No. 598 of 2025 -------- Etwa Bhaisa, age about 33 years, S/o Soma Bhaisa, R/o village-Jojobir, P.O. & P.S.-Gudari, District-West Singhbhum ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Appellant : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P. -------- Order No. 03/ Dated: 23rd September, 2025 I.A. No. 6792 of 2025 1. This application has been preferred by the appellant for condoning the delay of 07 days in filing the appeal. 2. Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed and the delay of 07 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3. I.A. No. 6792 of 2025 stands disposed of. Cr. A. (DB) No. 598 of 2025 4. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State. 5. This appeal is directed against the order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge-I, Khunti in B.P. No. 35 of 2025, arising out of Khunti (A.H.T.U.) P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 6. It has been alleged that the co-accused persons had taken away some minor children to Delhi without permission of their legal guardian on the allurement of providing a good job. 7. Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the appellant that four children were said to have been taken away and all four have been 2025:JHHC:29421-DB 2 Cr. A. (DB) No. 598 of 2025 recovered. It has been submitted that the appellant is in custody since 05.02.2025 and the accused persons who are said to have taken the victims to Delhi namely Ajay Kongari & Sandeep Sahni have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. A(DB) No. 1235 of 2023 & Cr. A(DB) No. 1565 of 2023, respectively. 8. Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant but has admitted that all the four children have been recovered. It has further been submitted that the appellant runs a placement agency and the other co-accused persons have taken the children to the placement agency of the appellant. 9. Regard being had to the fact that the persons who were the initiators of human trafficking have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as noted above and the period of custody undergone by the appellant, we while setting aside the order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge-I, Khunti in B.P. No. 35 of 2025, arising out of Khunti (A.H.T.U.) P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022, direct the appellant to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti. 10. Accordingly, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 23.09.2025 Basant/Arpit