2025:JHHC:13007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.5847 of 2024 ------ 1.Krishna Gope, son of Bhikhu Yadav 2.Sunita Devi, wife of Krishna Gope Both resident of village Kairo Dumar Toli, PO and PS Kairo, District Lohardaga … … Petitioners Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Victim … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P. For the OP No. 2 : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate ----- 07/ 30.04.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences registered under Sections 341, 323, 376, 504, 506, 509 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(i)(x)/3(i)(s)/3(i)(w)(i)/3(i)(w)(ii) of SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the father and mother of the main accused- Bajrang Gope who established physical relationship with the victim and now he is in custody. The allegation against these petitioners does not attract any of the sections under which FIR has been lodged. 4. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that when the victim girl went to the house of the petitioners with a request to marry, it is these petitioners who had stated they will not give their son for marriage as the victim is of different caste being “Kolh-Kolhin” and she was abused in the name of caste. 5. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is no specific allegation against these petitioners. 6. After hearing the parties, I find that before this complaint which was sent under section 156(3) of the Cr.PC for the same 2025:JHHC:13007 2 set of allegation an information was given by the informant to the police which is also part of the FIR, but the police did not lodged any case. In that written report there is no allegation against these petitioners who are none but the parents of the main accused Bajrang Gope. The allegation of sexual intercourse is against Bajrang Gope though the same continued for a long period of time. 7. The only allegation against these petitioners is in paragraph no.9 of the complaint wherein it has been stated that when the girl went to the house of Bajrang Gope these petitioners refused to get their son married with her stating that they cannot give their son for marriage as she is of different caste “Kolh-Kolhin”. It has further stated that she was abused in the name of caste but without specifying any details. 8. Considering the fact that there is nothing to suggest that entire incident had occurred in presence of public, thus, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 9. 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 Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Lohardaga, in connection with Lohardaga SC/ST P.S. Case No.8 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3