Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:18104 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 442 of 2026 Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Kumar Turi, represented through his father and Lawful Guardian Sri Baleshwar Turi, S/o Jethu Turi, R/o Gonyato, P.O. & P.S.- Penk Narayanpur, District- Bokaro … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikram Sinha, Adv. For the State : A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Sidhartha Roy, Adv. ---------- 02/22.06.2026 Heard Mr. Vikram Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. as well as Mr. Sidhartha Roy, learned counsel appearing for the informant. This application is directed against the order dated 17.01.2026, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, Bokaro in Criminal Appeal No. 04 of 2026, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bokaro in connection with Penk Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 53/2025, rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been affirmed. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 25.10.2025. It has further been submitted that the medical report does not support the factum of rape and in fact, the parents of the petitioner have sufficient means to take care of the petitioner and to prevent him from mixing with anti-social elements. Mr. Sidhartha Roy, learned counsel for the informant-victim has submitted that the petitioner is addicted to smoking and he has also referred to the Social Investigation Report while submitting there is a possibility that releasing the petitioner from custody would bring him in contact with other criminal minded persons. The allegation reveals that the petitioner on the pretext of marriage had established physical relationship with the informant-victim who was assessed to be aged 13 years. After establishing physical relationship, the petitioner had refused to solemnize marriage which led to institution of the case. Regard being had to the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and the Social Investigation Report which does suggest that releasing the petitioner would be detrimental to his progress, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order dated 17.01.2026, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, Bokaro in Criminal Appeal No. 04 of 2026 and consequently this application stands dismissed at this stage. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Dated, the 22nd June, 2026 A. Sanga/- Uploaded on 23 /06/2026 -2-