Dinesh Tirkey @ Nitin vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1671 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Dinesh Tirkey @ Nitin vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 9 March, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                           2026:JHHC:6176




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                  B.A. No. 1075 of 2026

              Dinesh Tirkey @ Nitin, aged about 18 year, S/o Budhdev Oraon, R/o
              Village - Keradanr, P.O. & P.S. - Sursang, District - Gumla
              (Jharkhand)                                ...     ...       Petitioner
                                       Versus
              The State of Jharkhand         ...        ...      Opposite Party
                                       ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Vandana Bharti, Advocate

---

03/09.03.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

in custody since 11.05.2025 in connection with Sursang P.S. Case

No.04 of 2025, corresponding to POCSO Case No.31 of 2025,

registered under Sections 70(2), 138 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

(BNS) 2023 and under Section 4, 6 of POCSO Act, now pending in

the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge POCSO Court cum

Additional Sessions Judge - IV, Gumla.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is in custody since 11.05.2025 in a case of gang rape and after

investigation, the charge has already been framed. He has submitted

that the father of the victim has lodged the F.I.R and given the name

of the petitioner along with others and the petitioner has been falsely

implicated in this case.

4. The learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the

prayer and submitted that the allegations are very serious and there is

direct allegation against the petitioner and the petitioner has also been

identified.

2026:JHHC:6176

5. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

that the petitioner was not put on TIP, but during their appearance in

the court, the victim had identified.

6. Considering the serious nature of allegation and the petitioner

being a named accused , this Court is not inclined to enlarge the

petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, this bail application is hereby rejected.

8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through "FAX/email".

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:09.03.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:10.03.2026