2026:JHHC:26302 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7586 of 2026 Vicky Yadav @ Bipin Kumar @ Bipin Kumar Yadav, aged about 25 years, S/O Biraj Yadav, Resident of village-Darha, P.O. + P.S.-Sadar (Chatra), District- Chatra, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Ms. Anshu Dubey, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Ruby Pandey, APP --- 05/01.09.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. case no. 256 of 2024, registered under Section 70 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under section 4 of the POCSO Act, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 28.08.2024 and as per the impugned order, the charge was framed under Section 70 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act and out of 07 charge- sheeted witnesses, 03 witnesses had already been examined. The impugned order is dated 05.02.2026. She has submitted that as per her information, one more witness has been examined on 14.07.2026. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of gang rape, but the medical evidence is not supporting the occurrence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the First Information Report was lodged after two days of the occurrence and there is unexplained and inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the trial is at advanced stage and the petitioner may not be released on bail. It is a case of gang rape. She also submits that the bail application of the petitioner was 2026:JHHC:26302 2 rejected twice earlier by this court. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected twice by this Court and there are serious allegations against the petitioner coupled with the fact that trial is at advanced stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. However, State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court. If there is any FSL report, the same be also forwarded to the learned court concerned. 8. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution, Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to the FSL, Ranchi to ensure compliance. 9. If the witnesses do not turn up, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after 09 months. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:01.09.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:01.09.2026