[2025:JHHC:15508] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4086 of 2025 ------ Md. Azam Ansari @ Azam Ansari, aged about 33 years, Son of Nayeem Ansari, Resident of Village- Singhaidih Ghat, P.O.- Gangtakala P.S.- Pathargama, District- Godda, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-13-06-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Pathargama P.S. Case No.179 of 2024 in Special (POCSO) Case No.03 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 96 of the B.N.S., 2023 and charge framed for the offences punishable under Section 318(2), 351(2), 96, 64(1), 65(1) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner procured the minor victim girl and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.11.2024 as is evident from para-15 of the instant bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of direct allegation that the petitioner of having committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of direct allegation against the petitioner as well as chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/