Jharkhand High Court
B.A./9175/2026 of JIYAUDDIN ANSARI @ JEYAUDDIN ANSARI @ JIYAUDIN ANSARI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 30 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9175 of 2026 Jiyauddin Ansari @ Jeyauddin Ansari @ Jiyaudin Ansari, aged about 20 years, Son of Amamullah Ansari, Resident of Namudag, P.O & P.S -Manika, District-Latehar. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
2026:JHHC:29392
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9175 of 2026
Jiyauddin Ansari @ Jeyauddin Ansari @ Jiyaudin Ansari, aged about 20 years, Son of Amamullah Ansari, Resident of Namudag, P.O & P.S -Manika, District-Latehar.
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Sonal Sodhani, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, APP
---
05/30.09.2026
Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.04.2026 in connection with Manika P.S. Case No. 37 of 2026, registered for offence punishable under Sections 127(2), 64(2)(i), 64(2)(m) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, now pending in the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO cum Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 14.04.2026. He has further submitted that the informant i.e., the mother of the victim and the victim herself have been examined before the learned court and both the witnesses have turned hostile. He submits that there is no likelihood of conviction of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the state has opposed the prayer for bail. However, she does not dispute that the informant as well as the victim have turned hostile.
5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the material witnesses, that is, the informant and the victim have already been examined before the learned court, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge
2026:JHHC:29392
2
POCSO cum Additional Sessions Judge-II, Latehar in connection with Manika P.S. Case No. 37 of 2026, on the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.
(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.
(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of even single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.
(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.
(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned trial court.
6. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.
7. Let this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through FAX/e- mail.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:30.09.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:01.10.2026