FAIYAJ ANSARI vs STATE — 637/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,115(2),126(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 16th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail Petition
CNR: BRRO100012262025
e-Filing Number
07-10-2025
Filing Number
1520/2025
Filing Date
08-10-2025
Registration No
637/2025
Registration Date
08-10-2025
Court
DJ Div. Bikramganj
Judge
12-District and Addl. Sessions. Judge-I
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
FIR Details
FIR Number
105
Police Station
Complaint P Bikramganj
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
FAIYAJ ANSARI
Respondent(s)
STATE
Hearing History
Judge: 12-District and Addl. Sessions. Judge-I
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 22-01-2026 | HEARING |
| 18-12-2025 | HEARING |
| 15-12-2025 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 637/2025 - FAIYAJ ANSARI v. STATE Decision: The court rejected Faiyaj Ansari's anticipatory bail application. The court found credible evidence of serious offenses under IPC §85, §115(2), and the Dowry Prohibition Act §3-4, including dowry demands of ₹60,000 after marriage, physical and mental harassment of the wife during pregnancy, refusal to support her and their newborn child, and further dowry extortion attempts at the wife's parents' home. Key Reasoning: The court determined that Ansari, as the named accused and husband, made unlawful dowry demands and subjected his wife to cruelty. The wife's testimony in court corroborated the serious nature of allegations. Given the gravity of charges involving dowry harassment and domestic cruelty, anticipatory bail was deemed inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 637/2025 - FAIYAJ ANSARI v. STATE Decision: The court rejected Faiyaj Ansari's anticipatory bail application. The court found credible evidence of serious offenses under IPC §85, §115(2), and the Dowry Prohibition Act §3-4, including dowry demands of ₹60,000 after marriage, physical and mental harassment of the wife during pregnancy, refusal to support her and their newborn child, and further dowry extortion attempts at the wife's parents' home. Key Reasoning: The court determined that Ansari, as the named accused and husband, made unlawful dowry demands and subjected his wife to cruelty. The wife's testimony in court corroborated the serious nature of allegations. Given the gravity of charges involving dowry harassment and domestic cruelty, anticipatory bail was deemed inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts