NAGENDRA KULUWA vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PRABHU DAYAL AGRAWAL — B.A./5140/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 376(2),506,IPC,67(A),IT,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 19th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010177882026

Filing Number

B.A./11479/2026

Filing Date

25-May-2026

Registration No

B.A./5140/2026

Registration Date

03-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Information Technology Act, 2000 ( 208 )

Sub-Category

Publishing And Transmission Of Containing Sexually Explict Act Or Conduct ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

19-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 376(2),506,IPC,67(A),IT,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NAGENDRA KULUWA

    Adv. ARUN KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PRABHU DAYAL AGRAWAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat ChoudharyView PDF

    The Jharkhand High Court rejected Nagendra Kuluwa's bail petition in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 376(2)(n)/506 and IT Act Section 67(A). The court held that despite contradictions in the victim's evidence, the seriousness of the alleged offence warranted continued custody. The court directed the State to expedite witness production to conclude the trial promptly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Jun-2026

    Fresh Filing (Admission)

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary

  4. 25-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. B.A./5140/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Jharkhand High Court rejected Nagendra Kuluwa's bail petition in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 376(2)(n)/506 and IT Act Section 67(A). The court held that despite contradictions in the victim's evidence, the seriousness of the alleged offence warranted continued custody. The court directed the State to expedite witness production to conclude the trial promptly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case