IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.4238 of 2024 ------ 1. Aakash Bouri @ Akash Bauri, aged about 22 Years, S/o Parka Bouri, 2. Kalu Bouri @ Prabhat Bouri @ Prvaut Bauri, aged about 19 Years, S/o Rajat Bouri, Both are Residents of Village – Malauti, P.O. + P.S.: Shikaripara, District: Dumka .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S. P. Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 18-02-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Shikaripara P.S. Case No.01 of 2024 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners, in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons, attempted to murder the wife and elder brother of the informant who had gone for a picnic to the place of occurrence after they refused to pay the extortion amount demanded by the petitioners and there is further allegation against the petitioners of committing robbery of Mangalsutra and cash of Rs.20,000/-. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that the injuries inflicted upon the head of the wife of the informant is grievous in nature. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-13 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. It is also submitted that there is delay in lodging the F.I.R. which casts a doubt upon the version of the informant. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that keeping in view the heinous nature of offence committed by the petitioners of attempting to murder an unarmed lady who went for a picnic and committing robbery by looting her and other persons, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation for recovery of the looted articles and to find out the details of the case. It is therefore submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/