( 2025:JHHC:16064 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10851 of 2024 ------ Govind Turi, aged about 32 years, son of Gujar Turi @ Uday Turi, resident of village-Gangjori, P.O. & P.S.-Jaridih, District-Bokaro. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 18-06-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No.106 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code & Section 66 A, 66 E, 67 of the I.T. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed rape upon the victim repeatedly by threatening her to kill her child. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that in her statement under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S. the victim had stated that the physical relationship was established with consent but on the second occasion when the petitioner forced upon the informant, the informant protest at the same. 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 06.08.2024 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 vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and that in her statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she has supported the entire prosecution case and categorically stated that of her being forcibly ravished by the petitioner; 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 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/