GHANSHYAM JHA vs THE STATE OF BIHAR — 335/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRBE100000522026

Filing Number

335/2026

Filing Date

11-Feb-2026

Registration No

335/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Manjhaul

Judge

2-Addl. District And Session Judge

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 17-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

80

Police Station

MANJHAUL

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GHANSHYAM JHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    Copy of Order

    The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Ghanshyam Jha and Abhiram Jha, accused of offences under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 76, 303(2), and 3(5). The court found that most charges were bailable, the injury caused was simple in nature, investigation was complete, and there was minimal risk of tampering with evidence. The petitioners were directed to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount and must comply with conditions including not tampering with witnesses or evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District And Session Judge

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl. District And Session Judge

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl. District And Session Judge

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Addl. District And Session Judge

  7. 16-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 11-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 335/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Ghanshyam Jha and Abhiram Jha, accused of offences under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 76, 303(2), and 3(5). The court found that most charges were bailable, the injury caused was simple in nature, investigation was complete, and there was minimal risk of tampering with evidence. The petitioners were directed to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount and must comply with conditions including not tampering with witnesses or evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case