Bail application under POCSO case involving Sections 75(1)(i), 76 BNS and Section 8 POCSO. Court noted direct and specific allegations against the petitioner and that four of eight witnesses were examined; declined bail but directed the State to promptly produce remaining witnesses during trial.
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:16238
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 4073 of 2026
Kanchan Yadav, Son of Jivlal Yadav … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
--For the Petitioner : Mr. Awanish Shekhar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, Advocate ---
04/8th June 2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 25 of 2025 arising out of Jarmundi P.S. Case No. 78/2025 for the offence registered under Sections 75(1) (i), 76 of BNS and Section 8 of POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Icum-Special Judge, Dumka.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is in custody since 05.07.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner. He has further submitted that as per the impugned order dated 15.04.2026, 4 witnesses, out of 8 were already examined. He submits that the trial may be expedited.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct and specific allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this bail application is rejected.
5. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the next date before the learned court is 25.06.2026.
1
2026:JHHC:16238
6. The State is directed to ensure prompt production of the witnesses during trial.
7. 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, so that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced on various dates including on 25.06.2026.
8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Dated: 08.06.2026 Uploaded On: 09.06.2026
Mukul/-
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner in custody since 05.07.2025 for POCSO offences should be enlarged on bail despite direct and specific allegations and a partly concluded trial.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kanchan Yadav, Son of Jivlal Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
