Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27196 (JHR)

NAKUL CHOUDHARY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./8896/2026 · 2026-09-24

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:28798 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8896 of 2026 Nakul Choudhary, aged about 33 years, son of Masudhan Chaudhary, resident of Village Gawan, Post office & Police Gawan, District- Giridih, (Jharkhand) … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- 06/24.09.2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. 2. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State Ms. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P., is also present. 3. Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.04.2026 in connection with Gawan P.S. Case No. 28 of 2026 corresponding to POCSO Case No. 74 of 2026, registered under Section 65(1) of the B.N.S. and under Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act, now pending in the court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Giridih. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and charge has already been framed. He submits that the petitioner may be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in connection with committing rape upon a girl, aged about 13 years who also became pregnant. The petitioner, who is aged about 33 years, is a happily married man having two daughters and son. 7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the direct allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected. 8. The charge has already been framed on 05.06.2026 and there are only six witnesses to be examined. ( 2026:JHHC:28798 ) 2 9. The State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the learned court and if there is any F.S.L. report to be produced before the Court, appropriate steps be taken so that the same is also forwarded to the Court concerned for the purposes of expeditious trial. 10. Learned counsel for the state is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and the Director Prosecution, to ensure compliance. 11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:24.09.2026 Nandini Date of Uploading: