[2025:JHHC:14951] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3924 of 2025 ------ 1. Mahabir Oraon aged about 21 Years S/O Late Ranjit Oraon R/O Village- Barri P.O. & P.S.- Puso District- Gumla (Jharkhand) 2. Sahabir Oraon aged about 20 Years S/O Late Ranjit Oraon R/O Village- Barri P.O. & P.S.- Puso District- Gumla (Jharkhand) 3. Punai Oraon aged about 19 years S/O Chhedna Oraon R/O Village- Kherra, Dipatoli P.O. & P.S.- Puso District- Gumla (Jharkhand) .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Ms. Mohua Palit, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 10-06-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Puso P.S. Case No.27 of 2024 corresponding to Special POCSO Case No.29 of 2024 registered under Section 70 (2), 96 of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 4/6/14 of the POCSO Act and Section 66-E, 67 (B) of I.T. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioners committed gang rape upon the minor victim girl and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is further submitted that the petitioners have not been put on Test Identification Parade even though they have been in custody since 01.08.2024. Hence it is submitted that the petitioners be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners, there is every chance of the petitioners absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioners ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners as well as their chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioners be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above- named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/