1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:4588 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 10803 of 2025 Aditya Patel @ Aditya Kumar Chaudhary, aged about 19 years, S/o. Udai Patel @ Uday Chaudhri, Resident of Village Bhagodih, P.O.- Bhagodih, P.S.- Ramna, District Garhwa (Jharkhand) …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rrishi Pallava, Advocate For the State :Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P. ----------- 03/Dated:17th February, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Mahila P.S. Nagar Untari Case No. 28 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 64(1) & 126(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Nagar Untari, Garhwa. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has committed no offence. It is submitted that there is delay of three days in lodging of the F.I.R. and no sign of rape was found on the person of victim. It is further submitted that husband of the informant used to send money on the mobile of the petitioner and petitioner used to hand over the money to informant. It is also submitted that victim has 2 been declared hostile during trial and she has not supported the occurrence. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 10.09.2025. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that there is direct allegation of committing rape upon victim and the she has supported the prosecution case during her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and trial is going on. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected. 5. Perused the F.I.R. and case diary, though learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that victim has been declared hostile and she has not supported the occurrence. 6. However, this Court is not inclined to look into evidence and evaluate the evidence of the informant at this stage as it is to be seen during trial by the learned Trial Court. 7. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected at this stage. 8. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 17 February 2026 Jay-Rahul/- Uploaded on 20.02.2026