JAMIR RAY @ ALFAJ vs STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - AJAY KR PATHAK — B.A./3840/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 69,BNS. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010121822026

Filing Number

B.A./7897/2026

Filing Date

10-Apr-2026

Registration No

B.A./3840/2026

Registration Date

02-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE ( 121 )

Sub-Category

SECTION 483 ( 5 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 69,BNS

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAMIR RAY @ ALFAJ

    Adv. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH,NISHA SINGH,NISHA SINGH, ,NISHA SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - AJAY KR PATHAK

  2. 2.VICTIM

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF

    Case Summary: B.A. 3840/2026 The Jharkhand High Court rejected Jamir Ray's bail application in a case involving charges under Sections 96 and 69 of the BNS 2023. The court found direct allegations against the petitioner, noted that a previous bail application was rejected, and determined that trial proceedings are ongoing, making continued custody appropriate. The court directed the State to ensure remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

  4. 28-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 10-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./3840/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: B.A. 3840/2026 The Jharkhand High Court rejected Jamir Ray's bail application in a case involving charges under Sections 96 and 69 of the BNS 2023. The court found direct allegations against the petitioner, noted that a previous bail application was rejected, and determined that trial proceedings are ongoing, making continued custody appropriate. The court directed the State to ensure remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case