2026:JHHC:27022 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8232 of 2026 Sudhanshu Kumar, aged about 30 years, Son of Ravi Ranjan Paswan @ Ranjan Paswan, Resident of Vill.- Kamat, P.O. and P.S - Sherghati, Dist.- Gaya (Bihar) … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, Advocate --- 03/9th September 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Garhwa Nagar P.S. Case No. 313/2026 for the offence registered under Sections 64(1), 351(2), 352, 3(5), 115(2), 126(2) of BNS, now said to have been pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Garhwa. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.07.2026 and has been falsely implicated in this case. 3. Upon a query of this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is not aware as to whether the charge-sheet has been submitted or not. However, the FIR has been lodged by the victim herself. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed the FIR and has submitted that the incident is of 10.02.2026 and the FIR has been lodged on 08.05.2026 and there is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. The FIR has been lodged only to pressurize the petitioner to marry the informant, whereas the family members of the informant are not ready to get her married to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is a direct allegation against the petitioner of forcibly committing repeated rape upon the victim. As per the FIR, the 2026:JHHC:27022 2 petitioner was threatening the victim that the video/photo would be made viral and that the victim is under constant fear. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner in the FIR of committing forcible sexual assault upon the victim and the fact that the victim appears to be under constant fear and is yet to be examined before the court during trial , this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 09.09.2026 Uploaded On: 10.09.2026 Mukul/-