( 2026:JHHC:5604 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.424 of 2026 ------ Sarju Kushwaha, aged about 31 years, Son of Badri Mahto, resident of village-Karonjiya, P.O. & P.S.-Chandwara, District-Koderma. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-25-02-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Koderma (Mahila) P.S. Case No.33 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1) & 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed rape upon the prosecutrix and made an obscene video of it and threatening that he will make the same viral. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that from August, 2025 to 16th September, 2025, the petitioner took the informant to his village and on 17.09.2025, the petitioner invited the informant for a settlement and in presence of respected persons of the village made the video viral. It is next submitted that in para-97 of the case diary, police has categorically mentioned that the informant could not produce any material to suggest that any photo or video being made viral and from the place of occurrence police verified both secretly and openly and it came out that no video was made viral at the time of meeting for settlement in presence of respected persons of the village. It is next submitted that the daughter of the informant has stated that the petitioner used to go to their house for over a year, but after the wife and mother of the petitioner beat up the informant and abused her and defamed the informant by making a false allegations, from that day, the petitioner stopped coming to their house. It is next submitted that independent witnesses namely Girija Devi, Usha Devi & Sumitra Devi have all stated about the love relationship between the petitioner and the informant and both the petitioner and the informant are married persons having two children each from separate partners. It is next submitted that at best it is a case of consensual sexual relationship. It is next submitted that the charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in Para-16 of this bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant and witnesses of the case during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.11.2025 as is evident from para-17 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Koderma in connection with Koderma (Mahila) P.S. Case No.33 of 2025 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number and will not annoy or disturb the informant and witnesses of the case during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 25/02/2026 Abhiraj/