2026:JHHC:29105 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7844 of 2026 Nitish Mahto @ Nitish Kumar Kushwaha, aged about 18 years, S/o Pavan Mahato @ Pawan Kumar Mahto @ Pawan Kumar Mahto, R/o Labda, Barharwa, P.O. & P.S. Barharwa, District Sahibganj … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. P. D. Agrawal, Advocate --- 10/28th September 2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2026 in connection with Barharwa P.S. Case No. 27/2026 for the offence registered under Sections 65(1), 352, 3(5) of BNS, Section 4 of POCSO Act and Section 67(A), 67(B) of IT Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sahibganj. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that he and the co-accused were preparing a video of the rape allegedly committed by the co-accused. The charge has been framed on 27.08.2026 and on 07.09.2026, the date was fixed for examination of the witnesses, but no witness has been produced. 3. However, upon a query of this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim is yet to be examined before the learned court. 4. Learned counsel for the State as well as the Informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the matter relates to rape of a minor victim and the petitioner and the co-accused were alleged to have prepared the video. The learned counsels submit that the victim is yet to be examined and the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. 2026:JHHC:29105 2 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the victim is yet to be examined before the learned court, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected. 6. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses before the learned court, particularly the victim who is required to be examined before the learned court within a period of one month from the date of cognizance. 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: 28.09.2026 Uploaded On: 30.09.2026 Mukul/-