( 2025:JHHC:12045 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3164 of 2025 ------ Prakash Ravidash @ Prakash Ravidas, aged about 50 years, S/o –Badhan Ravidas, R/o Padma, P.S. & P.O. –Barhi, Dist – Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Srivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22.04.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Barhi P.S. Case No.120 of 2024, Spl. POCSO Case No. 29 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act but the charges have been framed under Section 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed aggravated sexual intercourse with the minor victim girl of ten years by committing rape upon her. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.03.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the direct and serious allegation against the petitioner of committing a heinous offence of rape upon a minor girl of only ten years; there is every chance of the petitioner tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon a minor girl and the chance of his tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/