IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1984 of 2025 ------ 1. Mukesh Mahto, aged about 54 years Son of Rohan Mahto 2. Prameshwar Mahto aged about 27 years son of Kleshwar Mahto Both resident of vill-Karailbar, Gidhatori, P.O. and P.S.-B.Nagar, District Chatra. 3. Kalla Ganjhu @ Kallu Kumar @ Kallu Ganjhu aged about 26 years Son of Babulal Ganjhu 4. Kail Ganjhu aged about 69 years, Late Ratan Ganjhu Both resident of vill-Gidhatori, P.O. and P.S.-B.Nagar, District- Chatra. 5. Arun Ganjhu aged about 37 years Son of Late-Ramesar Ganjhu @ Arjun Ganjhu, resident of vill-Dholtangwa, P.O. and P.S.- B.Nagar, District-Chatra. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 26/03/2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.277 of 2019 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 33 of Indian Forest 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 cultivating poppy crops inside the forest area. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that there was no occasion of their name to be known to the complainant forest guard. It is next submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioners of damaging the forest area and the only allegation against them is that they have cultivated the forest land. It is next submitted that because of village politics, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not to go to the place of occurrence land or any other forest land 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.10,000/- 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 C.J.M., Chatra in connection with Complaint Case No.277 of 2019 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and they will not to go to the place of occurrence land or any other forest land 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.) Abhiraj/