[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Sunil Hansda @ Sonalal Hansda vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. ... on 25 March, 2026
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
2026:JHHC:8555
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.12044 of 2025
------
Sunil Hansda @ Sonalal Hansda, aged about 22 years, Son of
Chota Shivlal Hansda @ Shivlal Hansda, Resident of Village-
Chholapathar, P.O. & P.S.-Amrapara, District-Pakur, Jharkhand.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P.
------
04/Dated: 25.03.2026
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483
and 484 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 for consideration of regular bail,
in connection with S.T. No.117 of 2025 arising out of Amrapara
P.S. Case No.42 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No.568/2025
registered for the offence under Sections 70(1)/351(3) of the
B.N.S, which is pending in the Court of the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge-I at Pakur.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the entire
prosecution case is false, as would be evident from the
changed version of the victim. At the time of institution of FIR,
the allegation of committing rape by the three persons including
the present petitioner has been made but while giving her
statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, she has not stated
that she was subjected to gang rape.
3. It has further been contended that in absence of medical
evidence, the prosecution case has no leg to stand.
4. Learned counsel, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has
submitted that the entire prosecution version therefore is false
and as such, it is a fit ground for grant of bail.
5. While on the other hand, learned APP for the respondent-State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
6. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2026:JHHC:8555
7. The case diary has been called for, vide order dated
12.02.2026 which also includes the statement recorded under
Section 183 of the B.N.S.S.
8. This Court has gone through the FIR wherein the specific
allegation has been made against the present petitioner that it
is the petitioner who has taken away the victim from his house
and she was subjected to rape by the petitioner along with
other persons.
9. The statement which has been recorded of the victim under
Section 183 is in corroboration to the said statement, wherein,
the specific attributability has been casted upon the petitioner
that he is the person who has taken away the victim from her
house thereafter subjected to rape.
10. Argument which has been advanced on behalf of the petitioner
that the entire version of the victim has been changed, as
would be evident from the FIR and the statement recorded
under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S.
11. Even accepting the same to be correct, the nature of allegation
said to be committed by the petitioner cannot be said to be not
available, since, the specific attributability has been made
against the petitioner as would be evident from the FIR having
been corroborated by the statement recorded under Section
183 of the BNSS, wherein, it has been stated that it is the
petitioner who has taken away the victim from her house at
9:00 p.m. when she was sleeping in her house and carry her to
jungle area and forcibly committed rape.
12. So far as the argument advanced that there is no medical
report is concerned, since this Court is at the stage of
consideration of bail and as such, is to consider the case as
per the attributability casted upon the petitioner by the victim,
i.e., prosecutrix who has made specific allegation against the
present petitioner and the said fact has been corroborated by
the statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S.
2026:JHHC:8555
13. This Court, considering the specific attributability against the
petitioner and based upon the reason as referred hereinabove,
is of the view that it is not a case where the present application
is to be allowed.
14. Accordingly, the instant bail application is dismissed.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
25.03.2026
Rohit/-
