Dinesh Kumar Choudhary @ Dinesh ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2636 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Dinesh Kumar Choudhary @ Dinesh ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 2 April, 2026

                                                        2026:JHHC:9400




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    B.A. No.1823 of 2026
Dinesh Kumar Choudhary @ Dinesh Choudhary, aged about 22 years,
S/o. Jitan Choudhary, R/o. Gopalpur, Pilartola, P.O.- Sakrigali, P.S.-
Ganga Nadi, Dist.- Sahibganj, Jharkhand.
                                            ...      Petitioner

                                   Versus
The State of Jharkhand              ...      Opposite Party
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
For the Petitioner     : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Adv.
For the State          : Mrs. Lily Sahay, APP
Order No.03/Dated- 02.04.2026

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P.

2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with

Ganga Nadi P.S. Case No. 29/2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No.

751/2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 84, 87,

64, 303(2), 351(2) & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, which is pending in

the Court of learned C.J.M., Sahibganj.

3. The Petitioner along with co-accused persons are alleged to

have enticed away the victim and took her to Panjab for providing

her job, where they committed rape upon her on several occasions

for a period of one week. It is also alleged that they snatched her

golden and silver jewelries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that independent

witnesses, interrogated during the investigation, have categorically

stated that there was love affair between the petitioner and the

victim, who was already married. It is further submitted that due to

complaint lodged by father-in-law of the victim, both the petitioner

and victim returned from Punjab and there was protest against

solemnization of marriage as she was already married, therefore,

1|Page 2026:JHHC:9400

allegation of rape cannot be entertained at all. It is also submitted

that petitioner is in custody since 22.09.2025 and charge-sheet has

also been submitted in this case. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate

in the investigation and trial of the case and abides by all terms and

conditions which may be imposed. Hence, the petitioner may be

admitted to bail.

5. On the other hand learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for

bail of the petitioner and has submitted that there is no such

averment in the F.I.R. on the part of the victim that she was in love

affair with the petitioner rather she was induced for providing job

and thereafter petitioner raped her. Hence, the petitioner does not

deserve bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case

and nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to

release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the

petitioner stands rejected at this stage.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

02.04.2026 Rahul Uploaded on 02/04/2026

2|Page