Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:4630 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 10769 of 2025 Vishal Mahli, aged about 24 years, S/o. Ramesh Mahli, Resident of Near Hatia Talab, Power House, P.O. & P.S.- Chutia, Muffasil, District Ranchi (Jharkhand) …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Ms. Babita Bharti, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P. ----------- 03/Dated:17th February, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No. 129 of 2025 corresponding to Spl. POCSO Case No. 82 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 137(2) & 96 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-IV-cum-Spl. Judge, POCSO Act, Ranchi. 3. As per F.I.R., the petitioner is alleged to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years for the purpose of marriage, although the petitioner is married earlier. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:4630 ) 2 committed no offence. It is submitted that allegation of establishing physical relationship with the victim girl is concocted. It is submitted that the petitioner has tried to help the victim girl but he has been trapped by the informant. In paragraph-19 of the cross examination of the victim girl, who has been examined as PW-1, that the petitioner is alleged to have established physical relationship with her for first time when she was taken from Ranchi to Shilagai. It is further submitted that trial is going on and four witnesses have been examined, so far as learned counsel for the petitioner has copy of the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner is in custody since 13.03.2025. It is also submitted that the petitioner is pet-carer and works at NGO in Goa. It is also submitted that no sign of rape was found on the person of victim girl. It is next submitted that victim girl has stated during her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 that she wanted to marry this petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that there is direct allegation of enticing away the minor daughter of the informant. It is further submitted that trial is going on and four witnesses have been examined and the victim girl has supported the allegation Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:4630 ) 3 against the petitioner for establishing physical relationship with her during her evidence while examined as PW-1. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected. 6. Perused the F.I.R., case diary as well as the statement of victim girl recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and considered the submissions of both sides. 7. It appears that petitioner is alleged to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years for the purpose of marriage. It further appears that petitioner is already married earlier but still he enticed away the minor daughter of the informant and kept her for four days outside Ranchi and established physical relationship with her. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has insisted to go through the evidence but this court is of view that it will not be proper to find on the merits of prosecution witnesses and it may prejudice the case on either side. It also appears that victim girl is minor aged about 14 years. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 17 February 2026 Jay-Rahul/- Uploaded on 20.02.2026