1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1476 of 2024 ----- Atwari Swansi @ Jyoti aged about 28 years, Daughter of Sanika Swansi, Resident of village:Burju, P.O. Saiko, P.S. Saiko, District:Khunti. … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ------- CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------- For the Appellant : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. ------ Order No. 03/Dated 12th February, 2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the learned D.A.S.J.-I, Khunti in B.P. No.236 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with S.T. Case No.236 of 2023 arising out of Khunti (AHTU) P.S. Case No.01 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No.474 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 363, 370(4) and 374/34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been rejected. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where no ingredient either of Section 363 or 370(4) of the Indian Penal Code is being made out even then the appellant has been dragged in the present case in which she is languishing in judicial custody since 07.09.2024. 3. It has been submitted that the appellant is having no criminal antecedent. 4. It has also been submitted by referring to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. 2 wherein the victim herself has stated that she, after being scolded by her father, had gone to Delhi along with the present appellant, who happens to be the cousin sister of the victim. 5. It has been submitted that the chargesheet has already been submitted in the present case. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that it is a fit case to interfere with the impugned order. 7. While on the other hand, Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer to show interference with the impugned order. 8. It has been contended that the victim being a minor since has been accompanied by the present appellant to Delhi and, as such, it is incorrect on the part of the appellant to take the ground that no ingredient either of Section 363 or 370(4) of the Indian Penal Code is made out. 9. Learned State counsel, based upon the aforesaid ground, has submitted that if by taking into consideration the aforesaid reason, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected by the learned court, the same cannot be said to suffer from an error. 10. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties, gone through the finding recorded by the learned court in the impugned order as also the case diary including the 3 statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as available as Anulagnak-11, part of the case diary and reference of the same has been mentioned at Para-59 thereof. 11. The reference of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim in which has disclosed that when she was scolded by her father then she had gone to Delhi along with her cousin sister, the appellant herein. 12. It has also been stated that one Sanjay had provided engagement to her in a house. There she had worked for eight months and the money was being taken by said Sanjay and when police had come, she returned back to Khunti. 13. The issue of taking money is upon one another person namely, Sanjay. 14. The allegation against the present appellant is that being the cousin sister, she had accompanied the victim to Delhi. The girl has come back to her native place in the house of her parents. 15. The chargesheet has been submitted in this case and taking into consideration the period of custody, this Court is of the view that the impugned order needs interference. 16. Accordingly, order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the learned D.A.S.J.-I, Khunti in B.P. No.236 of 2024, is hereby quashed and set aside. 17. In consequence thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 4 18. Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned D.A.S.J.-I, Khunti in connection with S.T. Case No.236 of 2023 arising out of Khunti (AHTU) P.S. Case No.01 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No.474 of 2023, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent herself on the date fixed without any cogent cause. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered. 19. The instant criminal appeal stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Birendra/