RAJESH DAS @ RAJESH KUMAR DAS vs STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHWETA SINGH, ,ABHAY KISHORE,KAMDEO PANDEY — B.A./1801/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 137(2),87,65(1),BNS,4,6,POCSO,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 15th April 2026.
CNR: JHHC010048652026
Filing Number
B.A./3270/2026
Filing Date
09-Feb-2026
Registration No
B.A./1801/2026
Registration Date
21-Feb-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Coram
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
WOMEN & CHILDREN ( 196 )
Sub-Category
Protection of children from sexual offences Act ( 14 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
15-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Rejected
Last updated 22-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAJESH DAS @ RAJESH KUMAR DAS
Adv. SHREE NIVAS ROY,SUBHONIL SAMANTA,SUBHONIL SAMANTA, ,SUBHONIL SAMANTA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHWETA SINGH, ,ABHAY KISHORE,KAMDEO PANDEY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
15-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF
The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail application of Rajesh Das, accused of offenses under the BNS and POCSO Act for allegedly abducting and sexually exploiting a 15-year-old girl. The court dismissed the petitioner's argument that the victim was major and that a prior love affair negated the charges, holding that the victim's confirmed age of 15 years and the serious nature of allegations precluded bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
15-Apr-2026
Admission
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
-
13-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh ShankarView PDF
-
13-Mar-2026
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh Shankar
-
16-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. B.A./1801/2026
The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail application of Rajesh Das, accused of offenses under the BNS and POCSO Act for allegedly abducting and sexually exploiting a 15-year-old girl. The court dismissed the petitioner's argument that the victim was major and that a prior love affair negated the charges, holding that the victim's confirmed age of 15 years and the serious nature of allegations precluded bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts