[2026:JHHC:496] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10530 of 2025 ------ Nijam @ Najam Ansari @ Nijam Ansari, Aged about 27 years, Son of- Safique @ Fugli Mian, R/o Vill. Machiyadih, P.O. & P.S. Narayanpur, Dist: Jamtara .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikram Sinha, Advocate For the State : Ms. Vandana Bharti, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Ashutosh Pd. Joshi, Advocate Mr. Kumar Rahul, Advocate ------ Order No.04 Dated-09-01-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Narayanpur P.S. Case No.06 of 2025 corresponding to Special POCSO Case No.17 of 2025 registered under Section 96, 64, 126 (2), 115 (2), 352, 351 (2), 3 (5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail as earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 11.06.2025 passed in B.A. No.3886 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile two witnesses including the victim has been examined by the trial court and both of them have supported the case of the prosecution. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the alleged victim has improvised her case from the earlier statement made under Section 161 as well as under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 25.01.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the informant on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer for bail and submit that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner which has been supported by the overwhelming evidence that has come through the testimony of the victim and her mother, there is every chance of the petitioner being convicted and in order to avoid the harsh sentence that has been provided for the offence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail, hence, the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious and direct allegation against the petitioner of committing gang rape upon the minor victim girl and penetrative sexual assault upon her and the evidence that has come on record during the trial of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in the detailed order dated 11.06.2025 passed in B.A. No.3886 of 2025. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated- 09.01.2026-Animesh/