IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1041 of 2025 ------ 1. Majbul Miyan, aged about 71 years, Son of Late Eedris Miyan @ Idrish Miyan, 2. Ramjan Ansari, aged about 32 years, Son of Abdul Rahim Ansari, 3. Hasib Ansari, aged about 40 years, Son of Gyasuddin Ansari, 4. Akhtar Hussain @ Akhtar Ansari, aged about 50 years, Son of Abdul Halim All resident of village –Ranidih, P.O. –Saroni Bazar, P.S. Godda (Muffasil), District –Godda, Jharkhand. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Vinay Kr. Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 14.02.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Godda (Muffasil) P.S. Case No.264 of 2019 registered under sections 147/148/149/341/323/427/307/353 of the Indian Penal Code ready with Section 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 1986. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were the members of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly used criminal force deterring the police personnel from discharging their duties; when the police took into custody one child lifter and there is further allegation that the petitioners tried to break the door and window of Panchayat Bhawan. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners are innocent. 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 in any manner during the pendency of the case nor he will go to or near the house of the informant during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner 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 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda, in connection with Godda (Muffasil) P.S. Case No.264 of 2019 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 number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case nor he will go to or near the house of the informant 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-