MOHD ARSAD vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A. — BAIL/4193/2026

Case under Apprentices Act Section 60,48-60. Disposed: -- on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC010559862026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

28-Jan-2026

Registration No

BAIL/4193/2026

Registration Date

02-Feb-2026

Judge

Ashutosh Srivastava

Coram

Ashutosh Srivastava

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

U/s 439 Cr.P.C. for bail (minor) ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 27-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Apprentices Act Section 60,48-60

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MOHD ARSAD

    Adv. AJAY KUMAR TIWARI,SANGAM LAL KESHARWANI,SANGAM LAL KESHARWANI, ,SANGAM LAL KESHARWANI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    As Fresh

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Ashutosh SrivastavaView PDF

    The Allahabad High Court heard Mohd Arsad's second bail application (his first having been rejected on 26.05.2025). The court did not grant or reject bail on the merits but instead adjourned the matter, directing that the present bail application be listed along with previous bail papers after two weeks for fresh hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  8. 23-Feb-2026

    Ashutosh Srivastava

  9. 16-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 28-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/4193/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Allahabad High Court heard Mohd Arsad's second bail application (his first having been rejected on 26.05.2025). The court did not grant or reject bail on the merits but instead adjourned the matter, directing that the present bail application be listed along with previous bail papers after two weeks for fresh hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case