ANUPAM KUMARI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA, ,VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA — Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 13(2),13(I),(c),,13(I),(d),PC. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.
CNR: JHHC010133122026
Filing Number
Cr.A(SJ)/8580/2026
Filing Date
20-Apr-2026
Registration No
Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026
Registration Date
04-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CORRUPTION ( 120 )
Sub-Category
Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Last updated 19-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ANUPAM KUMARI
Adv. NAVEEN KUMAR,RAHUL RANJAN,RAHUL RANJAN, ,JASVINDAR MAZUMDAR,ANIKET JAISWAL,ROHAN MAZUMDAR,DIVYA CHOUDHARY,RAHUL RANJAN
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA, ,VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA
-
2.INDUSHEKHAR JHA
-
3.ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU,(ACB)
Case History
-
23-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
23-Jun-2026
Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar
-
18-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh KumarView PDF
Summary of Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026 The High Court of Jharkhand consolidated multiple criminal appeals (including Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026) involving vigilance and corruption charges. The court found that the State failed to identify specific crimes or victims despite appellants being in custody, calling this "a serious matter." The court granted provisional bail to appellant Kumari Ratnakar for one month on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, citing her young disabled daughter's need for maternal care. The case was adjourned to 23.06.2026 to allow the State to prepare comprehensively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Jun-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh KumarView PDF
-
20-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026
Summary of Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026 The High Court of Jharkhand consolidated multiple criminal appeals (including Cr.A(SJ)/416/2026) involving vigilance and corruption charges. The court found that the State failed to identify specific crimes or victims despite appellants being in custody, calling this "a serious matter." The court granted provisional bail to appellant Kumari Ratnakar for one month on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, citing her young disabled daughter's need for maternal care. The case was adjourned to 23.06.2026 to allow the State to prepare comprehensively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts