Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4336 (JHR)

TAHIR ANSARI v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./433/2026 · 2026-02-25

Rajesh Kumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:5505 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.433 of 2026 Tahir Ansari aged about 24 years, son of Adam Ansari resident of Village – Karra, P.O + P.S. Karra and District – Khunti, 835209 Jharkhand. …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, A.P.P --------- 02/Dated: 25 th February, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant, who is in custody since 22.05.2024, has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T. No.66 of 2024 (G.R. No.135 of 2024), arising out of T. Tanger P.S. Case No.22 of 2024, registered for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – I, Simdega. It appears that the prayer for bail of this applicant has been rejected twice on merit. Lastly, the prayer for bail of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 08.08.2025, passed in B.A. No.6941 of 2025. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that complete set of F.I.R along with its enclosures have been annexed with the present bail application and there is no suppression on his/ her part. Innocence of the applicant has been claimed and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that that the medical evidence suggests that the DNA of this applicant has not matched with the mixed DNA profile. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been renewed. 4. learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail stating that the victim has supported the allegation in her statement. 5. Considering the fact that the victim has supported her allegation even in her examination and cross-examination, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the applicant. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant stands rejected once again. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 25th February, 2026 Ravi-Chandan/- Uploaded on 26.02.2026