Regular bail application by an accused in a POCSO gang rape and murder case, allegedly implicated via a co-accused's confession. Considering the serious nature of allegations and ongoing trial with five of ten witnesses yet to be examined, the High Court rejected bail and directed prompt witness production.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2026:JHHC:17432
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 4011 of 2026
Choron Surin @ Charan Surin, S/o Rengo Surin … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Vandana Bharti, Advocate ---
06/16th June 2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Chhotanagra P.S. Case No. 01 of 2024 corresponding to Spl. POCSO Case No. 52/2025 for the offence registered under Section 302, 201 of IPC and cognizance has been taken under Section 376DA, 302/34, 201/34 and 120B of IPC and under Section 06 read with Section 5(g) and under Section 6 read with Section 5(j)(iv) of the POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge POCSO Act Cases, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 22.08.2025. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and he has been made accused on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Supai Champia.
3. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer for bail and has produced a copy of the FSL report before this Court. She submits that the case is of gang rape and as per the report received from the concerned court, which is dated 11.06.2026, out of 10 witnesses, five witnesses are yet to be examined including the Investigating Officer.
1
2026:JHHC:17432
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the serious nature of allegation made against the petitioner and that the trial is going on, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby rejected.
5. The FSL report, which has been produced before this Court, is returned to the learned counsel for the State and it appears that the FSL report has already been forwarded to the concerned court.
6. The State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses during trial.
7. The next date as mentioned in the status report is 24.06.2026.
8. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director, Prosecution as well as Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Dated: 16.06.2026 Uploaded On: Mukul/-
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, accused of gang rape and murder under POCSO Act and IPC provisions and in custody since 22.08.2025 on a co-accused's confessional statement, should be enlarged on bail during t
10 provisions across 2 enactments
Choron Surin @ Charan Surin
The State of Jharkhand
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
