IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2088 of 2025 ------ 1. Sambhu Mahli @ Shambhu Mohli, son of Raku Mahli, aged about 78 years, resident of Village-Thari Khasia, P.O. & P.S.-Sultanatikar, Sub-District-Ramgarh, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand)-814145 2. Ajay Kumar Murmu @ Ajay Murmu, son of Binod Murmu, aged about 23 years, resident of Village-Hasdiha, P.O. & P.S.-Hasdiha, Sub-district-Saraiyahat, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand)-814145 3. Sachin @ Sachindra Mirdha, son of Najir Mirdha, aged about 28 years, resident of Village-Bamankheta, P.O. & P.S.-Hansdiha, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand)-814145 4. Sri Ramvilas Mirdha @ Ram Vilash Mirdha, son of late Dasrath Mirdha, aged about 57 years, resident of Village- Tetariya, P.O.-Madhavgarh, P.S.-Hansdiha, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand)-814145 5. Pankaj Raut @ Panko Rout @ Pankaj Rout @ Panko Rout, son of Naresh Rout, aged about 32 years, resident of Village-Babhankheta, P.O.-Mahadevgarh, P.S.-Hansdiha, Dist.-Dumka (Jharkhand)-814145 … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K. Rashidi, Advocate : Ms. Aulia Begum, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sudhir Kr. Mahto, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 28.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Hansdiha P.S. Case No.68 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2)/ 190/ 126(2)/ 127(3)/ 115(2)/ 132/ 352/351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were members of unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly used criminal force against public servant - police personnel deterring them from discharging their duties and criminally intimidated them. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and they have not committed any offence. It is then submitted that communist party is a registered political party and the petitioners are its members. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 29 of the anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners be given the privilege 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 C.J.M., Dumka, in connection with Hansdiha P.S. Case No.68 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 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-