Magheshwar Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 972 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Magheshwar Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opposite ... on 10 February, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                            2026:JHHC:3481


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                        ----

A.B.A. No. 6706 of 2025

----

Magheshwar Oraon, son of Vijay Oraon, aged about 28 years, resident of Village Sisai Basti, PO and PS Sisai, District Gumla, Jharkhand .... Petitioner

-- Versus --

The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State :- Mrs Shweta Singh, Advocate For the Informant :- Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate

----

2/10.02.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner, respondent

State as well as the informant.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection

with Ghaghra P.S. Case No.98 of 2025, for offence registered under

section 376(2)(n), 506 of the IPC, pending in court of learned

Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gumla.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner and the

informant were in consensual relationship. He next submits that the

first allegation is of 21.10.2023 wherein the FIR is registered on

19.09.2025. He also submits that the petitioner has been falsely

implicated and even at one point of time she was found to be

pregnant and, on these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail

may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

2026:JHHC:3481

4. Learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned

counsel for the respondent State oppose the prayer and submit that

the relationship was established forcefully and the allegation is there

of making video and thereafter on the pretext of making that video

viral, the petitioner has exploited the informant several times and,

on these grounds, they submit that anticipatory bail of the

petitioner may kindly be rejected.

5. Looking to the contents of the FIR it transpires that first

relationship was established forcefully and of the same the video

has also been drawn by the petitioner and the allegations are there

against the petitioner of establishing further relationship on threat

of making the said video viral and in paragraph no.64 of the case

diary it has come that pen-drive and the photographs of this

petitioner has been produced in the court and it was seized. Having

relationship or friendship is one aspect, however, to take away the

dignity of anybody is another aspect, and in the attending facts and

circumstances of the instant case, I am not inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to petitioner.

6. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is,

hereby, rejected and hence, A.B.A. No.6706 of 2025 is, hereby,

dismissed.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 10.02.2026 SI/