2026:JHHC:24622 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6358 of 2026 Ramesh Gope, aged about 19 years, Son of Mangal Singh Gope @ Mangal Gope, resident of Village Raja Maidan, resident of village Purana Ulidih, P.O. & P.S. Mango, District East Singhbhum, presently residing at village Tentera, P.O. & P.S. Manjhari (Tantnagar O.P.) District West Singhbhum at Chaibasa … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate Mr. Birat Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Achinto Sen, Advocate --- 06/17th August 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Manjhari P.S. Case No. 51/2025 in Special POCSO Case No. 49/2025 for the offence registered under Section 76, 64(1), 303(2) of BNS and Sections 4 and 8 of POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II- cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 07.10.2025. The charge has been framed on 01.12.2025 and out of sixteen witnesses, six have already been examined including the informant, two child victims and the doctor. The next date in the case in 21.08.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the victims were aged 15 years and 17 years. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the trial is going on and there is direct and specific allegation 2026:JHHC:24622 2 made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 5. As per the report received from the concerned court, the likely period of conclusion of trial is three months. 6. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the remaining witnesses before the learned court. 7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 17.08.2026 Uploaded On: 18.08.2026 Mukul/-