[2026:JHHC:5038] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.11406 of 2025 ------ Sunil Soren @ Saran, aged about 58 years, son of – late Sufal Soren, resident of Sambalpur (Naya tola), P.O. and P.S.- Jirwabari, District- Sahibganj (Jharkhand) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim/Informant .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated- 19-02-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with S.T. Case No.62 of 2020 arising out of Complaint Case No.738 of 2017 registered under Section 376 (2) (k) of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim girl. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that though summoning order was issued against the petitioner in the year 2019 but the petitioner surrendered before the learned Magistrate only on 08.09.2025. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a Government servant employed in Indian Railway and he is having no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that the petitioner deserves protection under Section 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.09.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is absconding since the year 2019 and knowing pretty well that summoning order has been issued against him, he was evading his arrest and when the police made efforts to arrest him in execution of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued by the court in this case and finding no other alternative the petitioner has surrendered. It is further submitted that keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was absconding for more than six years and the charge is yet to be framed in this case, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing penetrative sexual assault upon a minor victim girl as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence and also the fact that the petitioner was at large since the year 2019 for over six years knowing pretty well that summoning order was issued against him, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated- 19.02.2026-Animesh/