IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2394 of 2025 Gono Tanti @ Sunil Tanti .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opp. Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Manjeet Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated : 28.03.2025 Heard both the sides. The petitioner- Gono Tanti @ Sunil Tanti is in custody since 09.11.2023 in connection with Chaibasa Muffasil P.S. Case No. 185 of 2023 corresponding to Special (POCSO) Case No.46 of 2023 for the offence registered under Sections 363, 376 and 306 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge (POCSO Act), West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. Earlier bail application of this petitioner was rejected on merit and the same has now been renewed on the ground that out of eight witnesses, only two have been examined after framing of charge on 02.01.2024. Mother of the deceased who is the informant of the case has not supported the prosecution case and was declared hostile. As per the FIR the deceased was living in the house of the petitioner where she has stated to have committed suicide, whereas in her deposition she has deposed that she died due to illness in her own house and has not attributed anything against the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. As per the FIR lodged by the mother, deceased had love affair with the petitioner and was living with him. It is also alleged that she used to be assaulted by the petitioner, and had left his company, but again started living with him. Later she received information that she had committed suicide by hanging. Mother of the deceased appears to have resiled from her earlier statement as given in the FIR and the trial does not appear to have progressed. However, examination of one or two witness cannot be taken as a ground for renewal of the bail application. No time frame can be given be given for conclusion of trial. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial, as the accused is languishing in custody. If the trial does not proceed further in six months, petitioner shall be at liberty to renew bail application. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, is hereby, rejected. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit