Arun Kumar Jaiwal alias Arun vs The State of Bihar — 174/2026

Case under Excise Act (Bihar) Section 30(a). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRMB100006732026

e-Filing Number

17-02-2026

Filing Number

670/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

174/2026

Registration Date

17-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Jhanjharpur

Judge

12-Dasj- IV

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 17-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

289

Police Station

PHULPARAS

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Excise Act (Bihar) Section 30(a)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Arun Kumar Jaiwal alias Arun

    Adv. Manoj Kumar Jha

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Special Judge of Jharia court rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Akshay Kumar Chowdhary in a case involving alleged illegal mining activities under the Mines Act and Bihar Mineral Ordinance. The court found sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused and refused to grant pre-arrest bail, holding that the prima facie case warranted custodial investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Dasj- IV

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Dasj- IV

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Dasj- IV

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Dasj- IV

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Dasj- IV

  8. 26-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Dasj- IV

  9. 18-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 174/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Special Judge of Jharia court rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Akshay Kumar Chowdhary in a case involving alleged illegal mining activities under the Mines Act and Bihar Mineral Ordinance. The court found sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused and refused to grant pre-arrest bail, holding that the prima facie case warranted custodial investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case