RAHUL SINGH @ RAGHAV vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - NEHALA SHARMIN — B.A./4918/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 147,148,149,120B,307,332,333,353,420,427,464,467,468,IPC,25(6),25(I-B),(a),26,27,35,ARMS,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 04th June 2026.
CNR: JHHC010175882026
Filing Number
B.A./11293/2026
Filing Date
22-May-2026
Registration No
B.A./4918/2026
Registration Date
30-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Coram
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
ARMS & EXPLOSIVES ( 104 )
Sub-Category
Arms Act,1959 ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
04-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Rejected
Last updated 05-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAHUL SINGH @ RAGHAV
Adv. JASVINDAR MAZUMDAR,ROHAN MAZUMDAR,ROHAN MAZUMDAR, ,GOURAV KISHORE,ROHAN MAZUMDAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - NEHALA SHARMIN
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon MukhopadhyayView PDF
The High Court of Jharkhand rejected Rahul Singh's bail application in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No. 219 of 2022, involving an alleged armed robbery at Muthoot Finance Corporation where miscreants fired at police and one died. The court denied bail primarily because the petitioner was apprehended at the crime scene, despite arguments that he had been in custody since September 2022 and only 10 of 19 witnesses had been examined. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-Jun-2026
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay
-
22-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. B.A./4918/2026
The High Court of Jharkhand rejected Rahul Singh's bail application in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No. 219 of 2022, involving an alleged armed robbery at Muthoot Finance Corporation where miscreants fired at police and one died. The court denied bail primarily because the petitioner was apprehended at the crime scene, despite arguments that he had been in custody since September 2022 and only 10 of 19 witnesses had been examined. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts