2025:JHHC:16608 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.7331 of 2024 ------ 1.Jakir Khan @ Zakir Kha, son of late Akram Khan @ Late Akram Kha, village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar 2.Kasib Khan @ Kasib Kha @ Kasif Kha, son of Md. Jakir Khan @ Md. Zakir Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar 3.Basid Khan @ Basid Kha, son of Md. Jakir Khan @ Md. Zakir Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar 4.Nehada Khatun, D/o Md. Jakir Khan @ Md. Zakir Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 3.Wajda Khatun @ Wajda Parween, D/o Late Takrim Khan @ Late Takrim Kha, W/o Hasib Khan @ Hasib Kha, R/o village Mahuatand, PO and PS Margomunda, District Deoghar … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, A.P.P. ----- 06/ 23.06.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences registered under Sections 341, 323, 313, 498A, 406, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 4 of Muslim Mahila (Marriage Prohibition) Act. 3. There is allegation against these petitioners that they have tortured the informant. It is the case that the petitioners are the in-laws of the informant. Further there is an allegation that because of demand of dowry and torture miscarriage has been caused. 4. During course of argument learned counsel for the State after going through the case-diary very fairly submits that there is no documentary evidence from any medium to suggest 2025:JHHC:16608 2 that there was a miscarriage. So far as torture and demand are concerned he submits that there are materials. He also submits that notices under section 41A has been issued to the petitioners but they have not appeared. He also admits that warrant of arrest has yet not been issued. 5. Considering the submission of learned counsels and also the fact that the petitioners are the in-laws of the informant and there is no material in the case-diary to substantiate offence section 313 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court find it a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. 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 JMFC, Madhupur, in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No. 53 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/her name or in the name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his/her share in the property. 7. Further it is made clear that once in every 15 days the petitioners will appear before the investigating officer and cooperate with the investigation. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3