SUBHASH KUMAR JHA ALLIAS SUBHASH JHA vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - LILY SAHAY — B.A./2445/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 377,506,IPC,4(2),POCSO,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010013242026

Filing Number

B.A./887/2026

Filing Date

14-Jan-2026

Registration No

B.A./2445/2026

Registration Date

23-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr.justice Sujit Narayan Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Mr.justice Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WOMEN & CHILDREN ( 196 )

Sub-Category

Protection of children from sexual offences Act ( 14 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 377,506,IPC,4(2),POCSO,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUBHASH KUMAR JHA ALLIAS SUBHASH JHA

    Adv. RUPESH KUMAR, ,ISHAN KUMAR JHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - LILY SAHAY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr.justice Sujit Narayan PrasadView PDF

    The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail application of Subhash Kumar Jha, accused of sexually abusing a 12-year-old boy under IPC Sections 377 and 506 and POCSO Act Section 4(2). The court found that the victim identified the accused and his statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC fully corroborated the occurrence, making the case unsuitable for bail grant given the serious nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mr.justice Sujit Narayan Prasad

  4. 29-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 14-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./2445/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail application of Subhash Kumar Jha, accused of sexually abusing a 12-year-old boy under IPC Sections 377 and 506 and POCSO Act Section 4(2). The court found that the victim identified the accused and his statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC fully corroborated the occurrence, making the case unsuitable for bail grant given the serious nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case