[ 2025:JHHC:12012] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. 2871 of 2025 Dipak Kumar Yadav, aged about 21 years, son of Late Binod Yadav, resident of village & P.O. Murpa, P.S.- Balumath, District-Latehar. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh , Adv. Mr. Shabina Perween , Adv. For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Ganjhu, Addl. PP 02 / 22.04.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Balumath P.S. Case no. 42 of 2024 corresponding to Spl. POCSO Case No. 27 of 2024, instituted under Section 376DA of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act and section 67B of Information Technology Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail and his earlier prayer for regular bail was rejected vide order dated 10.01.2025 in BA no. 7229 of 2024. The fresh ground is that the victim has been examined as PW3 during trial of the case, copy of her deposition has been annexed as Annexure 2 and the alleged victim has not supported the case of the prosecution rather she has categorically stated that she has falsely implicated the petitioner at the instance of several persons, the names of whom has also been revealed by her, in response to the question put by the court and she has also categorically stated that nothing happened with her and the villagers made her to institute the case. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 11 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 28.06.2024, as mentioned in para 13 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for regular bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts of the case , I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner on bail 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 Special Judge, POCSO, Latehar in connection with Balumath P.S. Case no. 42 of 2024 corresponding to Spl. POCSO Case No. 27 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-