ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Deoghar Town P.S. Case No. 12 of 2022 instituted under Sections 406, 417, 419, 420, 467, 468, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail. 3. As per FIR, petitioners posing themselves to be director of J.S.P.L. Banking and Financial Training Institute, Deoghar issued an advertisement for training and employment. It is further alleged that the informant approached to the petitioners and she was directed to deposit Rs. 2 lakhs security money, thereafter, she will be provided training for job. It is further alleged that on different dates from 11.12.2020 to 10.03.2021, the informant paid total Rs. 65,000/- to the said company. It is further alleged that on 12.03.2021, petitioners issued an appointment letter to the informant and she worked for 3 months but no amount was paid to the informant rather petitioners demanded remaining amount of Rs. 1.10 lakhs from her to secure her job. It is further alleged that the informant came to know that another lady namely Rinku Kumari has also been duped by petitioners by depositing Rs. 1.40 lakhs in the said company and no job was provided to her. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case with ulterior motive. It is further submitted that petitioners are directors of J.S.P.L. Banking and Financial Training Institute, Deoghar which is registered under Government of India (Annexure-2). The company provides training of different skills and after completion of training, the said company has M.O.A. with another company which provides jobs to the trainees. It is further alleged that the informant got training, thereafter, appointment letter was issued to her but she did not regularly attended the duty and most of months, she used to be absent. It is further submitted that without attending her duty, she was insisting for returning her money back which was taken for providing skill development to her. Petitioners are still ready to adjust the amount with the informant. It is further submitted that without attending her duty, she was insisting for returning her money back which was taken for providing skill development to her. Petitioners are still ready to adjust the amount with the informant. Petitioners have complied the notice under Section 41(A) of Cr.P.C. and are co-operating with the investigation of the case and they have no criminal antecedents and they further undertake to co-operate with the investigation of the case. It is further submitted that petitioners are directors of company, hence, there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence as the matter pertains to documentary evidence. Hence, the petitioners may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. 5. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State assisted with learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there are direct and specific allegations against the petitioners of cheating the informant in the name of providing job but petitioners neither provided job nor is returning her money. Hence, petitioners may not be extended privilege of anticipatory bail. 6. It appears that the core dispute is about training and employment as per agreement between the parties. The defence taken by the petitioners is that after training and placement, the informant herself did not appear and only few days salary was given to her. There is no provision for return of money that was deposited for the purpose of training and even total amount was not deposited by the informant herself. 7. Considering the factual aspects of the case and materials available on record against the petitioners and also in view of the fact that petitioners are co-operating in the investigation, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail 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 CJM, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Town P.S. Case No. 12 of 2022 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.