BHAGWANDEEN KOL @ RAJKUMAR vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A., ,RESHMA SONKAR — BAIL/4369/2026

Disposed: -- on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC010667242026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

31-Jan-2026

Registration No

BAIL/4369/2026

Registration Date

03-Feb-2026

Judge

Krishan Pahal

Coram

Krishan Pahal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

U/s 439 Cr.P.C. for bail (major) ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 27-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHAGWANDEEN KOL @ RAJKUMAR

    Adv. SARVJEET SINGH CHAUHAN,AJAY KUMAR GUPTA,AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, ,VIMAL KUMAR PANDEY,AJAY KUMAR GUPTA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A., ,RESHMA SONKAR

  2. 2.THE HIGH COURT LEGAL SERIVCE COMMITTEE

    Adv. RESHMA SONKAR

  3. 3.THE CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE

    Adv. RESHMA SONKAR

  4. 4.INFORMANT

    Adv. RESHMA SONKAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    —

    Krishan Pahal

  3. 28-Mar-2026

    Krishan PahalView PDF

    The Allahabad High Court adjourned the bail application of Bhagwandeen Kol @ Rajkumar without rendering a substantive decision. The court revised the case list and postponed the hearing to 6.4.2026 as a fresh matter, noting that counsel for the applicant and the Additional Government Advocate were present, but counsel for the first informant was absent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 28-Mar-2026

    —

    Vivek Varma

  5. 20-Mar-2026

    —

    Vivek Varma

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 06-Feb-2026

    Dr. Gautam ChowdharyView PDF

  8. 31-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/4369/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Allahabad High Court adjourned the bail application of Bhagwandeen Kol @ Rajkumar without rendering a substantive decision. The court revised the case list and postponed the hearing to 6.4.2026 as a fresh matter, noting that counsel for the applicant and the Additional Government Advocate were present, but counsel for the first informant was absent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case