In a bail application challenging the detention in a culpable homicide and POCSO case, the High Court of Jharkhand rejected the prayer at the initial stage due to direct allegations and the petitioner's relationship to the victim.
The petitioner is not enlarged on bail at this stage; the bail application is rejected.
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:27603
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 7443 of 2026
XXXXX
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
--For the Petitioner : Mr. P.P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Informant : Ms. Kaushiki Mishra, Advocate
07 /14.09.2026
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2026 in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case No. 119 of 2026 for the alleged offence registered under Sections 74, 75(1), 76, 77, 78(i), 79 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 8/12 of POCSO Act pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2026 and as per allegation in the first information report, the petitioner became nude and tried to outrage the modesty of the minor girl of the informant. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner happens to be neighbor and cousin brother of the victim. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has been sufficiently punished considering his custody and as charge sheet have already been submitted, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State and informant has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner is a habitual offender which has come even in evidence of the witnesses in the neighborhood. Learned counsel has further
1
2026:JHHC:27603
submitted that victim is yet to be examined before the court and therefore, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation against the petitioner who happens to be the cousin brother and also the neighbor of the victim and also the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, who has supported the allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.
6. The instant bail application is hereby rejected .
7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’ .
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
14.09.2026 Rakesh/Uploaded on:-16.09.2026
2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner charged under POCSO and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita should be enlarged on bail given the direct allegations and his relationship with the victim.
Whether the status of the victim's examination and the petitioner's prior community reputation are relevant considerations for bail.
Whether the substitution of IPC offences for Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita affects the bail jurisprudence in POCSO cases.
XXXXX
The State of Jharkhand
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
