Dismissed¶15

Karim Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC17 Mar 2026B.A./2106/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

B.A. No.2106 of 2026, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, Anil Kumar Choudhary, J., Order dated 17-03-2026 — bail rejected. Karim Ansari; murder of Shampu Khatoon; Kathikund P.S. Case No.25 of 2025; S.T. No.20 of 2026; Sections 140(3), 351(2), 103(1), 238 B.N.S, 2023; abduction; dead body thrown in well; stolen mobile phone; SIM card disclosure; technical cell; confessional statement; co-accused Shahid Ansari; no eye-witness; earlier bail rejected by Additional Sessions Judge-III, Dumka; risk of absconding and tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused: considering the serious nature of the allegation that the petitioner committed the murder of Shampu Khatoon, and the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, the Court held this was not a fit case for release on bail and rejected the prayer for bail.

Karim Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2026:JHHC:7337] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.2106 of 2026

¶2

------

¶3

Karim Ansari aged about 44 years, S/o Late Mikckel Ansari, Resident of Village – Manjhladih, P.O. + P.S. – Shikaripara, District- Dumka .... .... …. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶6

------

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arya Suman, Advocate For the State : Mr. Praful Jojo, Addl.P.P ------

¶9

Order No.02 Dated- 17-03-2026

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kathikund P.S. Case No.25 of 2025 (S.T. No.20 of 2026) registered under Section 140 (3)/ 351 (2) / 103 (1) /238 of the B.N.S, 2023.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has abducted the victim and committed her murder and caused destruction of the evidence of murder by throwing the dead body in a well with heavy bricks by putting the dead body and bricks in a plastic packet and tying the same with plastic rope. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that though in the rejection order regular bail application of the petitioner passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Dumka, it has been mentioned that the dead body of the deceased namely Shampu Khatoon was recovered from a well situated in the village Chirudih on being shown by the petitioner but the same was recovered on being led to discovery by the co-accused Shahid Ansari. It is next submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶13

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during the investigation of the case, material has come from the technical cell which goes to show that the petitioner was found to be conversing with the deceased with a stolen mobile phone, the

¶14

number of the SIM Card of which has been disclosed by the petitioner and from the same it is apparent that the petitioner along with co-accused persons being aggrieved by the deceased having relationship with a person with another community, have committed her murder. It is then submitted that another reason for the murder was that the petitioner was having personal grudge and acrimony towards the deceased; as the deceased on one occasion got the petitioner beaten by the villagers for the petitioner outraging her modesty. It is next submitted that the petitioner and the co-accused have disclosed in their respective confessional statement, of having committed the murder of the deceased after abducting her. Hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage.

¶15

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing the murder of Shampu Khatoon as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Dated- 17.03.2026-Animesh/

Karim Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karim Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalita Tuddu Alias Lalita Tudu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajendar Hembrom @ Rajendra Hembrom Vs State of Jharkhand

Rajnish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilip Kumar Sahu Alias Dilip Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surjeet Lal Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nasima Akhtari Vs the State of Jharkhand