IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1779 of 2025 ------ 1. Suresh Rai, aged about 64 years, son of Kartik Rai. 2. Rohit Rai, aged about 24 years, son of Suresh Rai. 3. Vishnu Rai, aged about 45 years, son of Late Goverdhan Rai. 4. Katki Rai, aged about 46 years, son of Jaglal Rai. 5. Sadachand Rai, aged about 30 years, son of Ramanand Rai. 6. Baleshwar Rai, aged about 37 years, son of Baldeo Rai. All are residents of Village Bagjhopa, P.O. Pakariya, P.S. Dumka (M), District Dumka, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Fulmani Devi, aged about 55 years, wife of Jagdish Ray, resident of Village Bagjhopa, P.O. Pakariya, P.S. Dumka (M), District Dumka, Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Durga C. Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 19-03-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint (P.C.R.) Case No.3924 of 2023 instituted under Sections 147, 149, 323, 384, 347 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Witch (Dain) Craft Act, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were members of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly caused hurt to the complainant, called her a Daain and forced the complainant to pay Rs.50,000/- to live in the village. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is further submitted that only because of village politics, the petitioners have been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that there is inordinate and unexplained delay of about four months in lodging this complaint. It is also submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the trial of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.5,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Dumka in connection with Complaint (P.C.R.) Case No.3924 of 2023 with the condition that they will co-operate with the trial of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the complainant in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/