IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1752 of 2025 ------ Priya Sharma, aged about 31 years, wife of Shri Shiv Shankar, resident of Jagannathpur, Road No. 9, Gamharia, P.O.- Gamharia, P.S.-Adityapur, Dist.-Seraikella-Kharsawan … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Preveen S. Dayal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Devesh Krishna, SC Mines-III ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No.292 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 420/406/407/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being a proprietor of business enterprises took cash credit facility against hypothecation of the stock of her share as collateral security but sold the stock behind the back of the informant-bank which extended the cash credit facility and closed the shop. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and due to Covid-19 Pandemic, the business of the petitioner was badly affected causing financial constraints. It is then submitted that two cheques of Rs.6,00,000/- which the petitioner had received from her customers towards the goods supplied by her firm were dishonoured in respect of which the petitioner has filed Complaint Case No. 2301 of 2020 and Complaint Case No. 5316 of 2023. It is also submitted that the petitioner was given cash credit facility on 27.06.2019 and the same was renewed by sanction letter dated 22.11.2022 wherein collateral security stand nil and India Coverage has been mentioned. It is also submitted that the petitioner did not have any fraudulent intention since the beginning of the transaction between the parties and she enjoyed the case credit facility with the informant bank, for a considerable period of time. It is then submitted that the petitioner 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 employees in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the State 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 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 C.J.M., Jamshedpur, in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No.292 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner 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 employees 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-