SUSHIL EKKA vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - BANDANA SINHA — B.A./2954/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 64(2),F/65(2),115(2),352,BNS,6,POCSO,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 13th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010110392026

Filing Number

B.A./7155/2026

Filing Date

02-Apr-2026

Registration No

B.A./2954/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-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

13-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 20-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 64(2),F/65(2),115(2),352,BNS,6,POCSO,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUSHIL EKKA

    Adv. SHADAB EQBAL,AYUSH RAJ,AYUSH RAJ, ,AYUSH RAJ

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - BANDANA SINHA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF

    The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail petition of Sushil Ekka, who has been in custody since May 2025 on serious charges including POCSO Act violations involving alleged offenses against a child. The court found the allegations sufficiently grave and noted the trial is at an advanced stage with three of six witnesses already examined, hence denying bail was appropriate. The court directed the State to promptly produce the remaining witnesses before the next trial date of April 21, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Apr-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./2954/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Jharkhand High Court rejected the bail petition of Sushil Ekka, who has been in custody since May 2025 on serious charges including POCSO Act violations involving alleged offenses against a child. The court found the allegations sufficiently grave and noted the trial is at an advanced stage with three of six witnesses already examined, hence denying bail was appropriate. The court directed the State to promptly produce the remaining witnesses before the next trial date of April 21, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case