Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:16391 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 113 of 2026 Arvind Kumar Singh, S/o Lakhan Singh, R/o village: Turbul, PO & PS: Kamdara, District: Gumla, Jharkhand . ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --- 02/08.06.2026 Heard Mr. Mohit Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. This application is directed against the order dated 06.12.2025, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum- Spl. Judge, Gumla in Kamdara P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024 (S.T. Case No.56 of 2025), whereby and whereunder, the application preferred by the petitioner for discharge has been rejected. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a consensual sex between the petitioner and the informant and in such circumstances, therefore, no case under sections 376/420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. It has been submitted that the learned trial Court has not considered these aspects of the matter or the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 BNSS and in view of the same, therefore, impugned order dated 06.12.2025 deserves to be quashed and set aside. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer made in this application. The allegations reveal that the petitioner had regular acquaintances with the informant and subsequently on the pretext of marriage established physical relationship with her on several occasions but thereafter he had refused to solemnize marriage. It has also been alleged that the petitioner had taken an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- as loan from the informant in several installments. The 183 BNSS statement as mentioned in the impugned order dated 06.12.2025 substantiates the allegations made by the informant in the First Information Report. At this stage, it would be premature to make any observation with respect to the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the backdrop of the 183 BNSS statement of the victim and the surrounding circumstances indicating about the act of the petitioner in establishing physical relationship with the informant on the pretext of marriage. The learned trial Court has considered all aspects of the matter and has rightly refused to discharge the petitioner for the offences under sections 376/420 of the Indian Penal Code vide impugned order dated 06.12.2025 and having found no reasons to conclude otherwise, this application stands disposed of. However, any observation made in this application shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.) 08.06.2026 S.B. Uploaded on 11.06.2026 -2-