IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 628 of 2025 ------ 1. Kamal Pahan @ Kamla Pahan, son of Chamu Pahan, aged about 40 years 2. Phagu Munda, son of late Budhuwa Munda, aged about 36 years, 3. Mangal Pahan @ Munda, son of late Jagannath Pahan, aged about 42 years 4. Bahmon Pahan, son of late Lurku Pahan, aged about 43 years 5. Mohan Pahan @ Man Mohan Munda, son of Siba Pahan, aged about 37 years 6. Dasa Pahan, son of late Etwa Pahan, aged about 44 years old 7. Sukra Pahan @ Sukra Munda, son of Godo Pahan, aged about 35 years 8. Khadia Pahan @ Sanga, son of Chamu Pahan, aged about 34 years 9. Suku Munda, son of Samuel Munda, aged about 32 years 10. Tulsi Pahan, son of Kunda Pahan, aged about 38 years 11. Baliram Pahan @ Baliram Munda, son of late Lakhu Pahan aged about 45 years 12. Mangal Dev Munda, son of Sukhua Munda, aged about 42 years, All the above resident of Village-Dumardaga, P.O.+P.S.- Khunti, Dist.-Khunti … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 29.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No.116 of 2024 registered under sections 61(2)/ 316(2) /318(4)/ 338/336(3) /308(3)/308(4)/308(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners are not vacating the mortgage property even after the expiry of the period of mortgage and intended to grab the property of the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the dispute between the parties at the most is a civil dispute. It is then submitted that a cloak of criminal case has been given to a purely civil dispute and admittedly, the land was mortgaged to the petitioners. It is further submitted that Sub Divisional Magistrate in Case No. 115 of 2023 directed the informant to file a case before the civil court but instead of the petitioner approaching the civil court, this false case has been foisted. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 12 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 and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency 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 abovenamed 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 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., Khunti, in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No.116 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 with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner 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-