[2026:JHHC:7781] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 101 of 2026 Karan Kumar @ Karan Kumar Ramani, aged about 18 years, son of Kartik Kumar Ramani @ Kartik Ramani, resident of vill- Kolhabad, Rohini, P.O. & P.S.-Jasidih, Dist: Deoghar. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Mohd. Zubair Khan, Advocate. ------ 03/ 19.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No. 245 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 376(D), 376(2)(n) and 313 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to Sections 71(1), 64(2)(m) and 89 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-POCSO, Special Court, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working in Wishvish Food Pvt. Ltd, Banaswadi, Bangalore since January, 2022 and he has got no knowledge about the alleged occurrence. He next submits that the police have investigated the case and submitted chargesheet against two of the accused persons, who have faced the trial and they have been convicted. He further submits that in the final form, the petitioner has been exonerated, [2026:JHHC:7781] -2- however, the learned court differing with the said final form has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioner. He then submits that the case diary has been called in this case and the same has been received, wherein the witnesses have been examined under Section 180 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and they have stated that the informant was willing to marry with the petitioner since the petitioner is a working person in a corporate office and for that only the petitioner has been implicated by the informant and that has been stated by the witnesses namely Asha Kumri and Vivek Kumar Rawani. He also submits that in para-147 of the case diary, there is disclosure about the CDRs of the mobile phones of the accused persons and their mobile tower location, in that also the CDR of mobile of this petitioner was not found there. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the final form has been submitted, however, the learned court differing with the said final form has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the informant has also opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there against the petitioner and the learned court has rightly taken the cognizance. 6. Considering that the petitioner has not been sent up for trial and two of the other co-accused, against whom, chargesheet has been submitted, have faced the trial and they have been convicted and further the learned court differing with the final form has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioner and the statements of the witnesses under Section 180 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 have been recorded, wherein they have stated that the petitioner is [2026:JHHC:7781] -3- a working person in a corporate office in the city of Bengaluru and an earning person and the informant was willing to marry with the petitioner, for that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and in that view of the matter, the petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today and the learned Court shall release the petitioner on such terms and conditions or the sureties as the learned Court may deem fit and proper. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-19.03.2026 Amitesh/-