[2026:JHHC:7960] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. no. 1961 of 2026 Ashok Yadav @ Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Kumar Yadav, aged about 21 years, son of Raju Yadav, resident of village- Sinduwari, P.O.- Chatra, P.S.- Chatra Bazar, Dist.- Chatra … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Subodh Kr. Dubey , Addl. PP 02 / 20.03.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sadar P. S. case no. 205 of 2024 corresponding to POCSO case no. 45 of 2024 instituted under Section 363, 366A and 34 the IPC. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail as his earlier bail application was rejected vide order dated 10.10.2025 passed in B.A. No. 9120 of 2025. It is next submitted that the fresh ground for admitting the petitioner on regular bail is that in the meanwhile, some of the witnesses including the victim, has been recorded and the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution but they have also admitted that there was land dispute between the petitioner and the father of the victim. It is next submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody and he is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner be admitted to regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view of the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner which has been confirmed by the deposition of all the witnesses including that the of the victim, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of his absconding, if released on bail, 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 again rejected for the same reasons as mentioned in the order dated 10.10.2025 passed in B.A. No. 9120 of 2025. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 20.03.2026 Smita/-