Jharkhand High Court
B.A./8960/2026 of PRADEEP PRAMANIK Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 24 September 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8960 of 2026 Pradeep Pramanik aged about 32 years son of Varun Pramanik, resident of village-Azad Basti Joda, P.O. and P.S. Keonjhar Joda, District-Keonjhar (Orisha) … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …
2026:JHHC:28768
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 8960 of 2026
Pradeep Pramanik aged about 32 years son of Varun Pramanik, resident of village-Azad Basti Joda, P.O. and P.S. Keonjhar Joda, District-Keonjhar (Orisha)
…
…
Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…
… Opp. Party
---
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner
: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party
: Ms. Bandana Sinha, Advocate
---
04/24th September 2026
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. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 12/2026 corresponding to Spl. POCSO Case No. 24/2026 for the offence registered under Sections 75/79/96/137(2) of BNS and Sections 6/8/10 of POCSO Act, now said to have been pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.03.2026 and has been falsely implicated in this case. The charge was framed on 21.05.2026 and till 24.08.2026, only 2 out of 11 witnesses have been examined including the victim and the victim is taking different stand. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS as well as her evidence before the learned court has been placed on record. The victim has already been examined, there is no further chance of tampering with any evidence and therefore the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail. However, the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, based on record, are not in dispute.
2026:JHHC:28768
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the victim has already been examined, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty- Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 12/2026, subject to 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 would deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his Mobile Number before the learned court below, which he shall 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.
5. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.
6. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e- mail/FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Dated: 24.09.2026
Uploaded On: 28.09.2026
Mukul/-