Dismissed¶¶13

Arshad Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC22 Jun 2026B.A./5161/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand HC bail application rejected; Arshad Ansari v. State of Jharkhand; B.A. No. 5161 of 2026; special POCSO Case No. 78 of 2025; Mango P.S. Case No. 231 of 2025; Sections 87 and 96 B.N.S. 2023; custody since 08.09.2025; consent and love-affair claim; victim minor aged 14 years per deposition; prompt production of remaining witnesses directed; Director Prosecution and SP to ensure compliance; Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.; 22.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

After hearing counsel for both sides and considering the facts and circumstances, including that the victim is a minor of tender age, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail; accordingly, the prayer for bail was rejected. Counsel's consent/love-affair submissions were heard but did not secure release. ¶¶13

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

¶1

2026:JHHC:18208

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5161 of 2026

¶3

Arshad Ansari S/o Md. Usman Ansari, aged about 22 years, residents of Azad Basti Road No. 5, P.O. & P.S.- Mango, District East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶7

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, Advocate

¶8

¶9

02/22.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶10

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2025 in connection with special POCSO Case No. 78 of 2025 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No. 231 of 2025, for the offence registered under Sections 87 and 96 of the B.N.S. 2023, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Jamshedpur.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that victim has been examined before the court and she has stated that she and the petitioner had physical relationship to which she consented. The learned counsel submits that it’s a case of consent and the petitioner happens to be the close relative of the victim and there was a love affair between them. The petitioner is aged about 22 years.

¶12

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that as per the deposition itself the age of the victim is 14 years.

¶13

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the victim being a minor of tender age , this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected.

¶14

6. However, trial is going on, the State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the learned trial court.

¶15

¶16

2026:JHHC:18208

¶17

7. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Director, Prosecution and also to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district to ensure compliance.

¶18

8. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e-mail.

¶19

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶20

Dated: 22.06.2026 Uploaded on: 22.06.2026 MM

¶21

Arshad Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad 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

MD Islam Alias Bali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahesh Kumar Paswan Vs M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Nagendra Kuluwa Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rohit Kumar Alias Rohit Kumar Chandravanshi Alias Golden Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suman Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sikandar Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand