2026:JHHC:10360 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2182 of 2026 Subodh Kumar, son of late Dhanesar Rabidas. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, APP --- 04/10.04.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2025 in connection with POCSO Case No.96 of 2025 arising out of Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No.268 of 2025, registered under Sections 64(1), 303 (2), 352 of the BNS and under Section 4, 6 of POCSO Act, now pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge (POCSO), Chatra. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is 19 years of age and there was love affair between the parties and the date of birth of the victim is 05.04.2008 and therefore on the date of occurrence she was 17 ½ years of age. The learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2025. 4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the allegation made in the F.I.R. reflects that the victim was taken away by the petitioner by stating that the brother of the victim had met with an accident and thereafter she was taken to an isolated place and rape was committed upon her. She submits that there is no indication of any love affair between the parties and the fact remains that the victim is a minor. She further submits that the victim is also pregnant. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and after considering the allegation made in the F.I.R. and the manner in which the offence is alleged to be committed, this Court is not inclined to 2026:JHHC:10360 2 enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge has already been framed. He submits that the trial may be expedited. 8. However, the State is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the Court as and when the trial commences. 9. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to the Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:10.04.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:13.04.2026