SALIM ANSARI ALIAS BABU MISTRI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - MANOJ KR MISHRA — B.A./3069/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 376(2)(f),376AB,IPC,6,POCSO,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010137852025

Filing Number

B.A./9342/2025

Filing Date

23-Apr-2025

Registration No

B.A./3069/2026

Registration Date

10-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

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 22-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 376(2)(f),376AB,IPC,6,POCSO,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SALIM ANSARI ALIAS BABU MISTRI

    Adv. SHUBHAM MISHRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - MANOJ KR MISHRA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF

    Summary: The Jharkhand High Court denied bail to Salim Ansari, accused of sexual abuse of an 8-year-old child under IPC Sections 376(2)(f), 376AB and POCSO Act Section 6. The court found direct allegations against the petitioner and considered the trial's commencement as grounds to refuse bail. However, the court directed the State to ensure prompt witness production to expedite trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar ChoudharyView PDF

  4. 12-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ambuj NathView PDF

  5. 05-May-2025

    Lawazima

    Registrar (Judicial)

  6. 23-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./3069/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Jharkhand High Court denied bail to Salim Ansari, accused of sexual abuse of an 8-year-old child under IPC Sections 376(2)(f), 376AB and POCSO Act Section 6. The court found direct allegations against the petitioner and considered the trial's commencement as grounds to refuse bail. However, the court directed the State to ensure prompt witness production to expedite trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case