( 2025:JHHC:10089 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2106 of 2025 ------ 1. Santosh Kumar Seth, aged about 44 years, s/o late Binda Ram Seth 2. Snigdha Kumari, aged about 38 years, w/o Santosh Kumar Seth Both r/o Gomo Road Harina, P.O. & P.S.-Nawagarh, Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Raj N. Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj D. Munda, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : None ------ Order No.02 Dated- 02.04.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Baghmara P.S. Case No.65 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2)/191(3)/329(3)/303(2)/352/351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. No one turns up on behalf of the informant in-spite of repeated calls. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not press the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in respect of the petitioner no.1- Santosh Kumar Seth as he has since been arrested. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in respect of the petitioner no.1- Santosh Kumar Seth is rejected as not pressed. So far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner no.2 submits that the allegation against the petitioner no.2 is that the petitioner no.2 was member of unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly committed criminal trespass and theft of Rs.50,000/- and all articles of the house and also criminally intimidated the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner no.2 and the informant are agnates. It is then submitted that there is land dispute between the parties hence, this false case has been foisted. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.2 is a female and from the side of the petitioner no.2, Baghmara P.S. Case No. 64 of 2024 was first instituted and as a counter blast, this false case has been instituted. It is also submitted that civil suit is pending between the husband of the petitioner no.2 and the informant and others. It is then submitted that the petitioner no.2 undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertakes that she 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 petitioner no.2 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 petitioner no.2 be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, she shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs. 10,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Dhanbad, in connection with Baghmara P.S. Case No.65 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner no.2 will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish her mobile number and a copy of her Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that she will not change her mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that she 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-