BHOLA HEMBRAM @ BHOLA HONHAGA vs STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - FAHAD ALLAM — B.A./3719/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 103,3(5),BNS,25(I-B),(a),35,26,35,27,35,ARMS,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010129362026

Filing Number

B.A./8333/2026

Filing Date

17-Apr-2026

Registration No

B.A./3719/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ARMS & EXPLOSIVES ( 104 )

Sub-Category

Arms Act,1959 ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 103,3(5),BNS,25(I-B),(a),35,26,35,27,35,ARMS,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHOLA HEMBRAM @ BHOLA HONHAGA

    Adv. YASHVARDHAN,KIRTIVARDHAN,KIRTIVARDHAN, ,PRATAYKSHA BHASKAR,MOHINI PRIYA,ADITYA AMAN,RITESH SINGH,KIRTIVARDHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - FAHAD ALLAM

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar ChoudharyView PDF

    Case Summary: B.A. 3719/2026 Decision: The Jharkhand High Court rejected Bhola Hembram's bail petition for the third time. The Court held that merely remaining in custody for extended periods is insufficient grounds to reconsider a bail application previously rejected on merit, particularly given the serious nature of the charges (criminal intimidation, criminal intimidation with weapon, and Arms Act violations). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./3719/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: B.A. 3719/2026 Decision: The Jharkhand High Court rejected Bhola Hembram's bail petition for the third time. The Court held that merely remaining in custody for extended periods is insufficient grounds to reconsider a bail application previously rejected on merit, particularly given the serious nature of the charges (criminal intimidation, criminal intimidation with weapon, and Arms Act violations). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case