2026:JHHC:18630 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5753 of 2026 Santosh Soren, Son of Sri Chandrashekhar Soren … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Nandan Prasad, Advocate : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP --- 02/25.06.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.04.2026 in connection with Godda (Town) P.S. Case No. 71 of 2026 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 476 of 2026, registered under Sections 69/115(2)/126(2)/189/67/351(2)/352 and 140(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on the basis of the First Information Report, it is apparent that one complaint case was filed by the victim and thereafter, it has been alleged in the present First Information Report that the petitioner and others had come to her house and assaulted her and again committed rape upon her. It has been alleged that the accused were asking the victim not to proceed with the case already registered. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the complaint case filed and has submitted that in the complaint petition itself, it has been mentioned that the petitioner and the victim got married through Hindu rituals (Sanatan dharm) and it was promised by the petitioner to the victim that they would marry as per the tribal rituals also, but the petitioner refused to marry as per tribal rituals and continued to have physical relationship with the victim, due to which the victim became pregnant and she was also subjected to abortion. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, 2026:JHHC:18630 2 has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the parties belong to tribal community and marriage was to be performed as per tribal rituals, but no such marriage was performed. However, the victim was assaulted and rape was also committed and she was being forced not to take any steps in the complaint case which had been filed earlier. 6. Learned counsel for the State has also submitted that as per the impugned order itself, the victim has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement recorded under section 183 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and it is a matter of safety and security of the victim. 7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the allegation made in the First Information Report, whereby the victim has made direct allegation against the petitioner , this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:25.06.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:25.06.2026