( 2026:JHHC:25169 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7849 of 2026 Sandip Kumar, aged about 25 years, son of late Mauji Lal, resident of village- Inayatpur, P.O. and P.S.- Sadarpur, District- Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P. --- 04/20.08.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.04.2026 in connection with Chakradharpur P.S. Case No.38 of 2026 for the offences registered under Sections 137(2) and 143(4) of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 4/6 of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum- Special Judge, POCSO Act case, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the F.I.R. itself, the petitioner was going with her sister back to residential School and on the way, she ran away. The F.I.R. was lodged by the victim. However, from the impugned order, it appears that the victim was recovered from the house of the petitioner from Uttar Pradesh. The learned counsel has submitted that the victim has ultimately been recovered and the POCSO Act has also been included in the case. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the victim has been recovered from the house of the petitioner and it is a case of trafficking of the minor girl and as such, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that upon recovery, the victim has made the allegations against the petitioner and other co-accused persons and as mentioned in the impugned order, there is allegation of forceful marriage and establishing physical relationship, this Court is not 2 inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. 6. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 20.08.2026 Uploaded on 21.08.2026 Jay/