YAMEEN vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A. — CRLA/4243/2026

Case under Andhra State Act Section 411,43-411. Next hearing: 01st January 1900.

Next hearing 01-Jan-1900

CNR: UPHC010828162026

Filing Number

CRLAD/

Filing Date

06-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRLA/4243/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-2026

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL APPEAL ( 400700 )

Sub-Category

Judgment in the matter relating to any other office mentioned in Indian Penal Code not covered in above categories. ( 85 )

Judicial Branch

Crl. Appeals

Last updated 03-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Andhra State Act Section 411,43-411

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.YAMEEN

    Adv. UMAIR MAHMOOD

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. 01-Jan-1900

    Next hearingPending

  2. 20-May-2026

    —

    Raj Beer Singh

  3. 20-Apr-2026

    —

    Raj Beer Singh

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    —

    Raj Beer Singh

  5. 03-Apr-2026

    —

    Santosh Rai

  6. 27-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 16-Feb-2026

    Manoj BajajView PDF

    Case Summary: CRLA 4243/2026 Appellant Yameen's bail application during the pendency of his criminal appeal was allowed. Yameen was convicted under Section 411 IPC for allegedly receiving stolen motorcycles and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. The High Court at Allahabad suspended his sentence and granted bail, requiring him to furnish a personal bond with two sureties (one a family member), finding sufficient grounds without commenting on appeal merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLA/4243/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRLA 4243/2026 Appellant Yameen's bail application during the pendency of his criminal appeal was allowed. Yameen was convicted under Section 411 IPC for allegedly receiving stolen motorcycles and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. The High Court at Allahabad suspended his sentence and granted bail, requiring him to furnish a personal bond with two sureties (one a family member), finding sufficient grounds without commenting on appeal merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case