2026:JHHC:24269 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7310 of 2026 Manoj Pahariya @ Jome Pahariya aged about 21 years, son of Maisa Pahariya, resident of village Dohri Pahad, P.O.+ P.S. Littipara, District- Pakur (Jharkhand) … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim X through her Guardian… … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sahay Gaurav Piyush, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl. PP --- 06/13.08.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.11.2025 in connection with Spl. POCSO No.04/2026 (arising out of Littipara P.S. Case No.61 of 2025), registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 70(1), 3(5) of BNS and charge sheet submitted under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 70(2), 3(5) of BNS, and Section 6 of POCSO Act, now pending in the court of learned Spl. Judge POCSO, Pakur, Jharkhand. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although it is a case of gang rape, but in the F.I.R. lodged by the victim, she has stated that her husband knew all the accused persons. He submits that the husband has been examined before the court, but he has not stated that he knew that accused persons earlier. 4. The learned counsel has also submitted that one of the accused persons was caught hold of and he took the name of other 4 accused persons. He has further submitted that the victim in her F.I.R. declared her age as 19 years, but charge sheet has also been filed under Section 6 of POCSO Act. He submits that the victim was a married lady and there is least likelihood that she was a minor. 5. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the trial is going on and the husband of the victim, appears to be the eye witness of the occurrence, inasmuch as 2026:JHHC:24269 2 he was caught hold of by two persons, and thereafter, in his presence his wife was raped. 6. He submits that the husband has identified all the accused persons, who were present. He has further submitted that so far as the allegation under Section 6 of POCSO Act is concerned, charge has already been framed and it is for the trial court to take into consideration the impact of the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He further submits that during investigation, the school certificate of the victim indicated that the victim was a minor. 7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the trial has already commenced, and that the victim is yet to be examined, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner, upon a query of this court, has submitted that next date in the trial is 21.08.2026. 9. The State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the court. 10. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance. 11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:13.08.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:14.08.2026