Ashok Oraon vs State Of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 2164 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ashok Oraon vs State Of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party on 19 March, 2026

Author: Deepak Roshan

Bench: Deepak Roshan

                                                                           2026:JHHC:7652


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          B.A. No. 30 of 2026
            Ashok Oraon, aged about 23 years, Son of- Dasai Oraon, resident of-
            village:  Dhodhra,      P.O.-Khora    B.O,    P.S.-Gumla,   &     District-
            Gumla(Jharkhand)
                                                                        ....Petitioner
                                        Versus
            State of Jharkhand                                   ....Opposite party
                                        ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurav Mahto, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P

--

03/19.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned P.P for the State.

2. The Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Gumla P.S.Case No. 184/2023, corresponding to POSCO Case No. 49/2023, registered for the offence under Sections 366A/376 (DA) of Indian Penal Code; under Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, pending in the Court of Exclusive Special Judge POCSO Court-cum- Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Gumla.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of self-confessional statement. He further submits that out of 13 witnesses, 8 witnesses have been examined. He further submits that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in custody since 22.06.2023; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation against this petitioner; as such, he does not deserve grant of regular bail.

5. Having regard to the allegation made against this petitioner as well as gravity of the offence, also the fact which transpires from the impugned order itself that out of 13 witnesses, 8 witnesses have been examined and the trial will be concluded very soon; as such, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. However, the learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

19th March, 2026 jk Uploaded on 19 /03/2026