Dismissed¶¶26

Mokhtar Ansari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC20 Apr 2026MCRC/3578/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application; regular bail; S.483 BNSS 2023; Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) & 238 BNS 2023; Crime No.125/2024; PS Kusmi; Balrampur-Ramanujganj; murder of woman and two children; skeletal remains; memorandum statements; seizures; first bail dismissed 13.08.2025 in MCRC No.6130/2025; 55 witnesses, only 1 examined; bail rejected without comment on merits; trial to be expedited; MCRC No. 3578 of 2026; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; order dated 21/04/2026.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicants; bail application rejected, with a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude it as early as possible. ¶¶26

Mokhtar Ansari Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the applicants; bail application rejected, with a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude it as early as possible.

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants, arrested in Crime No.125/2024 (PS Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj) for offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) & 238 of BNS, 2023, are entitled to regular bail in their second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, their first bail application having been dismissed on merits.

¶¶18

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the material collected and available on record against the applicants, and without commenting on the merits, the Court declined to release the applicants on bail; the second bail application was rejected.

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

Looking to the detention period of the applicants, the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and ensure its early conclusion; since only 1 of 55 prosecution witnesses has been examined, the prosecution and the defence were expected to cooperate for an expeditious trial.

¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Second regular bail application under S.483 BNSS, 2023 by Mokhtar Ansari and Arif Ansari, arrested in Crime No.125/2024, Police Station Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG), for offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) & 238 BNS, 2023 — Prosecution case of disappearance of Kaushalya Thakur with her two children, recovery of three human skulls, skeletons and clothes on 15.11.2024 identified as belonging to them, and seizures (blood-stained shirt, mobile phone, blood-stained Kathri, axe and knife) pursuant to memorandum statements of the applicants — First bail application dismissed on merits on 13.08.2025 in MCRC No.6130/2025 — Applicants stated (per counsel) to be in jail since 15.11.2024; only 1 of 55 prosecution witnesses examined — Held: bail rejected on the material on record without commenting on merits; Trial Court directed to expedite the trial and conclude it as early as possible; prosecution and defence expected to cooperate; Office to send certified copy to the trial Court and prosecution wing.

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed
by SHUBHAM
SHUBHAM SINGH
SINGH RAGHUVANSHI
RAGHUVANSHI Date:
2026.04.22
11:21:15 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 3578 of 2026

¶6

1 - Mokhtar Ansari S/o- Satar Asari, Aged About 38 Years R/o- Parsawar, Chowki Bargarh, Police Station Bhandaria, District- Garhwa (Jharkhand)

¶7

2 - Arif Ansari S/o- Satar Ansari Aged About 22 Years R/o- Parsawar, Chowki Bargarh, Police Station Bhandaria, District- Garhwa (Jharkhand)

¶8

... Applicants

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station-Kusmi, District-Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.)

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

(Cause-title is taken from CIS)

¶13

For Applicants : Mr. Amitesh Ku. Pandey, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Ram Narayan Sahu, Dy. G.A.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board

¶15

21/04/2026

¶16

Heard.

¶17

Admit.

¶18

This is the second bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.125/2024 registered at Police Station Kusmi, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) & 238 of BNS, 2023.

¶19

¶20

1^st bail of the applicants was dismissed on merits vide order of this Court dated 13.08.2025 passed in MCRC No.6130/2025.

¶21

As per the prosecution case, on 05.10.2024, a missing report was lodged by complainant Surajdev that his wife Kaushalya Thakur left home with her daughter Muskan Tahakur and son Mintu Thakur on 26.09.2024, stating she was going to the market, but never returned. Thereafter, a case was registered against Arif Ansari for allegedly luring and taking away Kaushalya Thakur and her children. Later, Mokhtar Ansari was implicated. On 15.11.2024, three human skulls, skeletons and clothes were found in the paddy field of village Dahejwar, Kanchanpur and Parasnath which were identified as belonging to Kaushalya Thakur and her children. During investigation, memorandum statements of applicants Mokhtar Ansari and Arif Ansari were recorded, pursuant to which incriminating evidence, including a blood-stained shirt, a mobile phone, a blood-stained Kathri, an axe & knife were seized. The accused were arrested and the charge sheet was filed against the applicants.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the only change in circumstances is that one witness has been examined. There are total 55 witnesses and till date only 1 has been examined. The applicants are in jail since 15.11.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Therefore, considering all these facts, the applicants may be released on bail.

¶23

State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application and submits that this is the case of triple murder and there is sufficient evidence available on record against the applicants, therefore, the applicants may not be granted benefit of bail.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶25

¶26

Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the material collected and available on record against the applicants, without commencing on merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicants on bail.

¶27

Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected .

¶28

However, looking to the detention period of the applicants, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial and to ensure that the Trial is concluded as early as possible.

¶29

In this case, there are a total of 55 prosecution witnesses, and only 1 has been examined till date. It is expected that the prosecution and the defence shall cooperate for the expeditious trial.

¶30

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned as well as to the prosecution wing for necessary information.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

( Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE

¶33

Shubham

Mokhtar Ansari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mokhtar Ansari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aditya Kumar Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

B.L. Gangwani Vs C. Yajulu Rao

Narendra Alias Chhotu Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pranay Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh