IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.85 of 2025 ----- Sunita Tirkey, aged about 49 years, wife of Justin Toppo, Resident of House No.1061, Ward No.-7, Dargah Wali Gali, Kasai Bada, PS- Mehrauli, PO-Mehrauli, National Capital Territory-South Delhi (New Delhi) ....... … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------- For the Appellant : Mr. Naveen Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, APP ------ Order No.03/Dated: 26th March 2025 1. The instant appeal under section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 has been directed against the order dated 19.12.2024 passed by the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in Bail Petition No. 1813 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with Anti Human Trafficking Unit (Ranchi) PS Case No.01 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 363, 365, 370 of the IPC, Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and Section 25/26 of Inter State Migrant Workman (Regulation of Employment And Condition of Service) Act has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been implicated. 3. It has been contended that the appellant has not been arrested on the spot rather she has been apprehended on the confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Sushila Khes. It has been contended that co-accused, namely, Sushila Khes has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.996 2 of 2024. The appellant has been languishing in judicial custody since 31.10.2024 and a charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. 4. It has been contended that the case of the present appellant is identical to that of the said co-accused, namely, Sushila Khes, who has been directed to be released on bail by the order of this Court. 5. It has further been contended that though the appellant is having one criminal antecedent vide AHTU Gumla PS Case No.08 of 2021 (S.T No.42 of 2022), but in the said case she has been acquitted by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Gumla vide order dated 26.05.2022. In this regard, a copy of the status of the case/trial has been produced in the Court which has been retrieved from E-Court Service. 6. Let the said report be kept on record. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid ground, has submitted that the impugned order may be interfered with. 8. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant stating that the nature of allegation said to be committed by the appellant is serious, however, he has not disputed the fact that the co-accused, namely, Sushila Khes has been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 25.11.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.996 of 2024 by this Court and the appellant has been acquitted in AHTU Gumla PS Case No.08 of 2021 (S.T. No.42 of 2022) by the learned trial Court. 9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across the findings recorded by the learned trial Court in the impugned 3 judgment as also the testimonies of the witnesses and other material exhibits available therein. 10. The main ground taken on behalf of the appellant is that the case of the present appellant is on similar footing of the co-accused, namely, Sushila Khes, who has been directed to be released on bail by the order of this Court. 11. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the principle of parity is to be made applicable in the present case. This Court has also considered the fact that the appellant has been acquitted in AHTU Gumla PS Case No.08 of 2021 (S.T. No. 42 of 2022) by the learned trial Court and, accordingly, we are of the view that the appellant has been able to make out a case for grant of bail and the impugned order needs to be interfered with. 12. Accordingly, the order impugned dated 19.12.2024 passed by the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi in Bail Petition No. 1813 of 2024 in connection with Anti Human Trafficking Unit (Ranchi) PS Case No.01 of 2024, so far as it relates to the present appellant is concerned, is hereby, quashed and set aside. 13. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 14. In consequence thereof, 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 the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, in connection with Anti Human Trafficking Unit (Ranchi) PS Case No.01 of 2024, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent herself on the date fixed without any 4 cogent cause and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered. 15. I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sudhir