IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1819 of 2025 ------ 1. Vijay Mallah @ Vijay Nishad @ Vijay, aged about 32 years, Son of Kalicharan Mallah @ Nishad, 2. Shivam Mallah @ Sonu Mallah @ Shivam Kr. Nishad, aged about 24 years, Son of Late Gopal Nishad @ Gobra Mallah, Both resident of MOCP, Alakdiha, ShivMandir, P.O. Tisra, P.S Tisra, District Dhanbad. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate : Mr. Agnivesh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, Addl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24/03/2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Baliapur P.S. Case No.98 of 2024 registered under sections 76, 74, 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 127(1), 127(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners outraged the modesty of the victim. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and for the similar allegation, the informant has earlier instituted a false case vide Tisra P.S. Case No. 54 of 2022 and after investigation, the case was found to be false and police did not send up the petitioner for trial. It is next submitted that there is an inordinate and unexplained delay of about 13 days in lodging the F.I.R and the statement of the victim was recorded under oath on the 25.09.2024. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners; drawing attention of this Court to page no.22-23 of the brief that since the petitioners are helping the mother-in-law of the informant, hence the informant has lodged this false case to harass him. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertakes that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant 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 privileges 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 Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, in connection with Baliapur P.S. Case No.98 of 2024 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 numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case with further condition that that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or her 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.) Abhiraj/