MD. JAVED ALIAS MD. JAWED v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./2566/2026 · 2026-04-10
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5944 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5944 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:JHHC:10409 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 2566 of 2026
------ Md. Javed @ Md. Jawed, aged about 21 years, son of Md. Faruk, Resident of Village Roshnapur, P.O. Roshanpur, P.S. – Pirpainti, District –Bhagalpur, State –Bihar.
… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.02 Dated- 10.04.2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No.06 of 2025 corresponding to Special POCSO Case No. 45 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under section 96 of the B.N.S., 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second journey of the petitioner for grant of regular bail and earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 17.07.2025 in B.A. No. 6002 of 2025. It is next submitted that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile six witnesses have been examined including the alleged victim who has been examined as P.W.3 and she has categorically stated that she does not know the petitioner and nobody has procured her nor anybody has established physical relationship with her. It is further submitted that in view of the deposition of the victim, there is no justification for further incarceration of the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.03.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 22 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during
the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 Special Judge, POCSO, Godda, in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No.06 of 2025 corresponding to Special POCSO Case No. 45 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
10.04.2026
Sonu/