( 2025:JHHC:13480 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3587 of 2025 ------ Om Prakash Yadav, aged about 20 years, s/o Binod Yadav, r/o Village-Pandedih, P.O. & P.S.-Markacho, Dist.-Koderma, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kr. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawin Kr. Singh, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 05.05.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Nawalsahi P.S. Case No.56 of 2024 (S.T. No. 117 of 2024) registered for the offences punishable under sections 64/331(4)/351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape upon the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the victim was in love with the petitioner and this is a case where the petitioner was having physical relationship with the victim. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the victim and had the contention of the petitioner that it was a consensual physical relationship was true, there was no occasion for the informant to make direct allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon her forcibly by threatening to kill her children. It is next submitted that in view of the conduct of the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner tampering with evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing rape upon the victim as well as the chance of his tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/