( 2026:JHHC:19058 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5925 of 2026 Sego Barjo @ Sega Barjo … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P. --- 04/30.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. Case No. 380 of 2025, arising out of Gudri P.S. Case No. 03 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No. 252 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 103(1)/238/3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 4/5 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practice Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II- cum-Spl. Judge POCSO Act Cases, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2025 and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has further submitted that out of 07 witnesses 02 witnesses have been examined and they have not made any allegation against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that bail application of the co-accused Loknath Barjo @ Lokhnath Barjo has been rejected by this court in B.A. No. 549 of 2026 vide order dated 08.04.2026 considering the heinous nature of offence. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this court finds that trial is going on and out of 7 witnesses, 2 have already been examined till 19.02.2026. 6. Similarly situated co-accused has been denied bail vide order dated 08.04.2026 in B.A. No. 549 of 2026 in which State has already been directed to produce the witnesses promptly before the learned court . ( 2026:JHHC:19058 ) 2 7. The case of the petitioner is similar to that of the co-accused Loknath Barjo @ Lokhnath Barjo whose bail has been rejected, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected. 8. Let this order be communicated to the concerned court through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 30.06.2026 Uploaded on: 01.07.2026 Binit/