Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9051/2026 of KARTIK KUMAR Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 28 September 2026
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9051 of 2026 Kartik Kumar aged about 18 years, son of Sanjay Prasad @ Sanjay Saw, Resident of village-Guriya, P.O. and P.S. Pratappur, District- Chatra … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. XXXX (Victim)
( 2026:JHHC:29168 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9051 of 2026
Kartik Kumar aged about 18 years, son of Sanjay Prasad @ Sanjay Saw, Resident of village-Guriya, P.O. and P.S. Pratappur, District- Chatra
…
…
Petitioner
Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. XXXX (Victim)
…
… Opp. Parties --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anupam Anand, Advocate
: Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Ruby Pandey, APP
---
02/28.09.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with POCSO Case No. 69 of 2026, arising out of Pratappur P.S. Case No. 49 of 2026 for the offences registered under Sections 70 (2), 126 (2),127 (2),78 (2), 351 (3), of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 4,6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 66(E), 67 (A), 67 (B), of the Information Technologies Act, 2000 and Section 3(1) (r), 3 (1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chatra.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 22.05.2026 and in the meantime the victim as well as the informant-mother have been examined before the court and both of them have turned hostile. He submits that there is delay of three months in lodging the FIR.
4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail, however, the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is not in dispute.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that material witnesses have already been examined and it appears that the victim has turned hostile, the petitioner above named is directed to be enlarged on bail on his
( 2026:JHHC:29168 ) 2
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chatra, in connection with POCSO Case No. 69 of 2026, arising out of Pratappur P.S. Case No. 49 of 2026 on the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.
(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.
(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.
(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.
(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below.
6. Let this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e- mail.
7. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 28.09.2026 Uploaded on 30.09.2026 Binit/