( 2026:JHHC:25125 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6800 of 2026 Manoj Singh @ Manoj Kumar Bhuiyan son of Bhuneshwar Bhuiya … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, APP For the Informant : Mr. Govind Ray Karan, Advocate --- 05/20.08.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 31 of 2026, for the offences registered under Sections 69, 89, of the B.N.S. 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Giridih. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.04.2026 and charge has been framed for the alleged offence under Section 69 and 89 of the BNS, 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim and the petitioner both were married and the victim is a widow having child. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner and the victim were residing in the same locality and it was well known to the victim that the petitioner is a married person and there is allegation that the petitioner had established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage and due to that the victim became pregnant and her pregnancy was also terminated. 4. The learned counsel for the State and the informant have opposed the prayer and have submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and that the petitioner established physical relationship with the victim and raped her on the pretext of marriage and by deceitful means, her pregnancy was terminated. They have submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has supported the prosecution case and the victim is yet to be examined. As per charge sheet there are 05 witnesses. ( 2026:JHHC:25125 ) 2 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation against the petitioner who happens to be a married person and the victim is a widow having child and she has also supported the allegation under Section 183 BNSS and the victim is yet to be examined, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected. 6. However, the State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the court. There are only 05 witnesses to be examined as per the prosecution case. 7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned District and to the Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance. 8. Let this order be communicated to the concerned court through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 20.08.2026 Uploaded on 21.08.2026 Binit/