Yudhisthir Saha @ Yudhisthir Kumar Sah ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 2629 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Yudhisthir Saha @ Yudhisthir Kumar Sah ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party on 2 April, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                     ( 2026:JHHC:9422 )




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                            B.A. No. 2679 of 2026

            Yudhisthir Saha @ Yudhisthir Kumar Sah aged about 29 years, son of
            Baneshwar Saha, resident of Patharia, P.O. and P.S. Kotalpokhar,
            District-Sabibganj                       ...    ...      Petitioner
                                   Versus
            The State of Jharkhand              ...          ... Opp. Party
                                   ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kkumar, A.P.P.

---

02/02.04.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 27.01.2026 in connection with Kotalpokhar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 75(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 8/12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and charge sheet has been submitted under Section 75(2), 333 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act) Sahibganj.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is delay of 13 days in lodging the FIR. She submits that it has been alleged that the petitioner being the tuition teacher has sexually abused the victim. It has been submitted that the statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023. In the said statement, though she has supported the prosecution case but it appears that FIR is an exaggerated version. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case on 28.02.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner and victim has also supported the prosecution case and the delay is sufficiently explained in view of the fact that certain video of the victim was also recorded by the petitioner as alleged.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the direct allegation made against the petitioner, this court ( 2026:JHHC:9422 )

is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

6. However, charge sheet has been submitted in this case, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of witnesses at the stage of trial.

7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution and also the Superintendent of Police of the concerned District.

8. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 02.04.2026

Uploaded on: 03.04.2026

Binit/