2026:JHHC:26644 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8120 of 2026 Irfan @ Md. Irfan @ Md. Irfan Alam, Age 26, S/O- Umar Farooque, R/o- Nizam Nagar, P. O+P.S Hindpiri, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Pandey, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Ruby Pandey, Advocate --- 06/3rd September 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Spl. POCSO Case No. 49 of 2026 arising out of Kotwali P.S. Case No. 80 of 2026 for the offence registered under Section 74, 351(2) of BNS and Section 8/12 of POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-IV at Ranchi. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner was merely a driver of the school van. 3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the victim is a three years old school going child and injury was found on her private part of the body. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, has also supported the allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner, the fact that the petitioner is the sole accused and that the victim aged three years also sustained injuries on her private parts and has supported the allegation made against 2026:JHHC:26644 2 the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 5. At this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge has already been framed on 01.07.2026 and the mother of the victim has been examined. There are altogether nine witnesses in the case. The learned counsel submits that appropriate observation may be made, so that the trial is expedited. 6. The State is directed to ensure prompt production of the 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: 03.09.2026 Uploaded On: 03.09.2026 Mukul/-