2026:JHHC:26032 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7489 of 2026 Satish Kumar, aged about 19 years, son of Sri Ashok Ram, resident of Village Dasharo Khurd, P.O. and P.S. Markacho, District Koderma, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Ayushi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, APP For the Informant : Mr. Arwind Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Abhishek Ranjan, Advocate --- 04/29.08.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2026 in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 96 of 2026 arising out of Sariya P.S. Case No. 45 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 96, 137(2) & 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2026 and charge sheet has been submitted for alleged offence under Sections 74, 75(1) and 76 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8/12 of POCSO Act. She submits that cognizance has been taken on 29.06.2026 but charge has not been framed so far. She submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the victim has supported the allegation in her statement recorded under Section 183 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The learned counsel also submits that the victim is 16 years of age. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that there is direct and specific allegation against 2026:JHHC:26032 2 the petitioner and the victim has supported the allegation coupled with the fact that material witnesses are yet to be examined before the learned court, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:29.08.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:01.09.2026