IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6401 of 2024 ------ 1. Sudipta Dutta 2. Jayanti Sen … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.06 Dated- 07.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.180 of 2024 registered under sections 419 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 80/81 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 has taken the child of the informant in the connivance with the petitioner no.2 who is a Sahiya; by representing that instead of the informant, who was in fact admitted in hospital for delivery of the child, the petitioner no.1 was falsely shown in the record is of the hospital, having been admitted in C.H.C. Gamharia. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the offence punishable under Section 419 of Indian Penal Code is a bailable offence and in the absence of any allegation of any adoption without following the prescribed procedure, the offence punishable under Section 80 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is not made out and without any allegation of selling or buying of any child, the offence punishable under Section 81 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is also not made out. It is then submitted that the child has been restored to the biological mother. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 9 of the anticipatory bail application. 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 above named 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. 10,000/- 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 C.J.M., Seraikella, in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.180 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 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-