2026:JHHC:14795 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3414 of 2026 Ravi Kumar @ Hansraj Kumar, Son of Sanjay Prasad Saw @ Sanjay Kumar Saw … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedy, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, Advocate --- 04/14th May 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Bashisth Nagar P.S. Case No. 108/2025 for the offence registered under Sections 64, 74, 75, 115(2), 127(4), 137(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS and Sections 4 & 8 POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chatra. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 28.01.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been submitted. He submits that there is an allegation in the FIR that the victim, who is a minor, was enticed by the petitioner and taken to Delhi. Thereafter, the petitioner established physical relationship with her and she was subsequently assaulted and brought back to Ranchi. The relationship continued and she was assaulted by the petitioner from time to time. The learned counsel submits that the victim is more than 17 years of age and in her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, she has stated that with the consent of the family members, the marriage was performed on 15.04.2025. 3. The learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned counsel for the State have opposed the prayer and submitted that even on 2026:JHHC:14795 2 15.04.2025, when the marriage is alleged to have been performed, the age of the victim was 16 years 10 months and 30 days. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties upon going through the statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, this Court finds that the victim in her statement has stated that she was a student of Class-IX and had married the petitioner on 15.04.2025. Then, she was taken to Delhi and the entire incident of assault and sexual abuse has been mentioned. She has also stated that she married the petitioner on her own. 5. Considering the serious nature of allegation and the age of the victim, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected. 6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 14.05.2026 Uploaded On: 15.05.2026 Mukul/-