( 2026:JHHC:8215 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2322 of 2026 ------ Ravi Shankar Sharma @ Guddu Sharma, aged about 26 years, S/o Late Sudi Sharma, R/o Village –Japla, P.O. & P.S. – Hussainabad, District –Palamau, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24.03.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Hussainabad P.S. Case No.226 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 137(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted under Section 137(2), 64(2)(m), 65(1), 87 and 140(3) of the BNS and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.10.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 13 of the bail application. It is then submitted that charge sheet has been submitted and charge has also been framed but no witnesses have been examined by the trial court. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl, hence there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the chances of the petitioner absconding as also tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 24.03.2026 Sonu/