BINIT KUMAR SINGH ALIAS VINIT SINGH VINIT KUMAR SINGH vs STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PRAFUL JOJO, ,AMIT KUMAR CHOUBEY — B.A./4261/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 80,61(2),352,351(2),BNS,3,4,DP,ACT,27,ARMS,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 10th June 2026.
CNR: JHHC010098962026
Filing Number
B.A./6414/2026
Filing Date
24-Mar-2026
Registration No
B.A./4261/2026
Registration Date
14-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Coram
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
FAMILY MATTERS ( 132 )
Sub-Category
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Rejected
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BINIT KUMAR SINGH ALIAS VINIT SINGH VINIT KUMAR SINGH
Adv. Dr.SUVENDU JAIPURIAR, ,NEHA AGRAWAL,SANJAY KUMAR UPADHYAY,SUNIL KUMAR JAISWAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PRAFUL JOJO, ,AMIT KUMAR CHOUBEY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF
Case Summary: B.A. 4261/2026 The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the bail application of Binit Kumar Singh, accused of his wife's death by bullet injury within four months of marriage. The court found direct allegations of dowry demand and arms recovery based on the petitioner's confessional statement sufficiently grave to deny bail, despite the defence arguing weak evidence and lack of independent witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
-
08-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. B.A./4261/2026
Case Summary: B.A. 4261/2026 The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the bail application of Binit Kumar Singh, accused of his wife's death by bullet injury within four months of marriage. The court found direct allegations of dowry demand and arms recovery based on the petitioner's confessional statement sufficiently grave to deny bail, despite the defence arguing weak evidence and lack of independent witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts