IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.6157 of 2024 ------ 1. Hafiza Bibi @ Hafiya khatoon aged about 24 Years D/O Mokbir Khan R/O Village- Dhodhodumar P.O.- Gopibandh P.S.- Sarath District- Deoghar (Jharkhand). 2. Saleb Khan @ Abu Saleh Khan aged about 20 years son of Mokabir Khan resident of village- Dhodhodumar PO- Gopibandh PS- Sarath Dist- Deoghar. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Niranjan Kr. Sinha, Advocate Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated-10-03-2025 I.A. No.2892 of 2025 Heard the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer for early hearing. Since this Anticipatory Bail Application is heard today, hence, this interlocutory application is disposed of being infructuous. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) A.B.A. No.6157 of 2024 Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Sarath P.S. Case No.26 of 2024 registered under Sections 363/366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 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 were involved in procurement of minor victim girl for solemnizing marriage with the co-accused Ashique Khan. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is then submitted that the victim herself has eloped with the co-accused Ashique Khan and the age of the victim has been stated to be 18 years and she is a major girl. It is then submitted that there in inordinate delay of 3 days in lodging the FIR. It is further submitted that the victim has been examined under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner 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 in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the victim has categorically stated that her age is 17 years and she is a minor and both the petitioners pressurized her to solemnize marriage with the co- accused Ashique Khan and the petitioner No.2 threatened the informant to kill the informant and her family members; unless she goes with him for solemnizing marriage with the co-accused Ashique Khan. It is next submitted that the co-accused also tried to change the religion of the victim and forcibly made her to sign some documents to show that she deliberately left her house and no one is responsible for leaving her house. It is also submitted that in view of the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner; of being in furtherance of the common intention with the co- accused persons of kidnapping, procuring and ultimate commission of penetrative sexual intercourse by the co-accused upon the victim, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the case. Hence, it is 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 to find out the details of the case, this Court is not inclined to give the privileges of anticipatory bail to the abovenamed petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the abovenamed petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/