Parveen Kumar @ Praveen Ray vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1722 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Parveen Kumar @ Praveen Ray vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 10 March, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                              2026:JHHC:6272




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                        B.A. No. 1308 of 2026

     Parveen Kumar @ Praveen Ray, aged about 21 years, Son of Shyam
     Ray, resident of Village- Sigarpur, P.O. + P.S. Banka, District-Banka
     (Bihar).                                    ...     ...     Petitioner
                               Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                ...        ... Opposite Party
                               ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Purnendu Kr. Jha, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Advocate

---

04/10.03.2026

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2025 in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No. 18 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 419 of 2025 arising out of S.T. No. 210 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 87 and 96 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the cognizance has been taken under Section 96 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II, Godda.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim was found missing and in the First Information Report (F.I.R.) it has been alleged that the petitioner who is aged about 21 years had taken the victim. He submits that there is a delay of lodging the F.I.R. by 21 days. He also submits that the victim has been examined before the court wherein she has stated that she had herself eloped with the petitioner and during her cross-examination she has stated that she was more than 18 years of age at the time of occurrence and she also refused to undergo medical examination.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer by stating that the victim is a minor girl.

2026:JHHC:6272

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and that the petitioner is aged about 21 years (as per the bail application) and the facts that the victim has stated in her deposition that she had gone with the petitioner willingly and she also refused to undergo medical examination, the present 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 learned Additional District and Sessions Judge- II, Godda in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No. 18 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 419 of 2025 arising out of S.T. No. 210 of 2025 on 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 will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will 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.

6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

7. 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 'FAX/E-mail'.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 10.03.2026 Rakesh/-

Uploaded on:-11.03.2026