( 2025:JHHC:16779 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4956 of 2025 ------ Azal Ehshan @ Ajal Ehshan, aged about 34 years, son of Ehsanul Haque, Resident of Village 28 Bhandaridih, P.O. and P.S. Giridih (T), District-Giridih. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Advocate : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24-06-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bengabad P.S. Case No.58 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and cognizance under Section 64(1) and 127(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape upon the prosecutrix. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there was frequent conversation between the victim and the petitioner over phone and there is a delay of three days in lodging the FIR. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-16 of this bail application. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 20.04.2025 as is evident from para-15 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner 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 fact that, it is the admitted case of the prosecution that the petitioner earlier used to give tuition to the children of the informant-victim and it is not unusual for a parent to talk to a tuition teacher. It is next submitted that the delay in lodging the FIR in rape cases is common; because keeping in view the sensitive nature of the occurrence, women many times hesitates to go to police immediately after the occurrence. It is next submitted that in view of specific and direct allegation against the petitioner of ravishing the prosecutrix, which is supported by the prosecutrix in her statement appearing in para-16 of the case diary; there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the victim, after tying her and gagging her mouth with a bundle of clothes as well as the chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/