Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13562 (JHR)

DHARMENDRA KUMAR VISHWAKARMA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./1117/2026 · 2026-02-17

Gautam Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:4541 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1117 of 2026 ------ Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma, S/o Rampati Vishwakarma, R/o Vill- Adima, PO & PS Haidarnagar, Dist.-Palamu .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Altamash Khan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, APP ------ Order No.02 / Dated : 17.02.2026. I.A. No. 2387 of 2026 This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner wherein prayer has been made for early hearing of the instant bail application. Prayer is allowed. I.A. No. 2387 of 2026 is disposed of. B.A. No. 1117 of 2026 Heard both the sides. This bail application has been filed on behalf of Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma who is in custody since 13.09.2025 in connection with S.T. Case No. 105 of 2025 arising out of Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No. 25 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 64(2) (m) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-II, Lohardaga, is pressed into motion. As per the FIR, on19.04.2024 the petitioner committed rape with a victim married lady, aged about 27 years. It is alleged that he continued to established physical relationship on false promise of marriage. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of petitioner that there is an inordinate delay of more than one year and three months in lodging FIR. The prosecutrix is a married lady and therefore, the allegation of establishing physical relationship on a false promise of marriage is not sustainable in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand (2020) 10 SCC 108. 2026:JHHC:4541 Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Under the circumstances, the above-named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-(Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ Uploaded 18.02.2026