( 2025:JHHC:15540 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4161 of 2025 ------ 1. Premlal Kerketta, aged 24 Years, S/o –Jolen Kerketta, Resident of Vill –Konsa, P.O. & P.S. –Kamdara, District – Gumla. 2. Manoj Kerketta, aged 26 Years, S/o –Late Mavshal Kerketta, Resident of vill –Konsa, P.O. & P.S. –Kamdara, District –Gumla. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Ms. Vani Kumari, Advocate : Mr. Aniket Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 13.06.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Anandpur P.S. Case No.02 of 2024, Special POCSO Case No. 17 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 376(D)/506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners committed gang rape upon the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the victim and her mother who have been examined as witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 12.02.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 that the petitioners have committed gang rape upon the minor victim girl which amounts to penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl and both the victim and her mother have supported the case of the prosecution, so, there is every chance of the petitioners tampering with the evidence and absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the chance of their 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 petitioners be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/