RAVI vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A., ,VIRESH KUMAR YADAV,CH. DIL NISAR,RAHUL GAUR — BAIL/8507/2026

Disposed: -- on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 12-Mar-2026

CNR: UPHC011345142026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

BAIL/8507/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Judge

Vivek Varma

Coram

Vivek Varma

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

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 30-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAVI

    Adv. JITENDRA PRASAD MISHRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A., ,VIRESH KUMAR YADAV,CH. DIL NISAR,RAHUL GAUR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Vivek VarmaView PDF

    The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to applicant Ravi in a case involving charges under Sections 191(2) and 107 BNS (abetment of suicide). The court found that the essential ingredients of Section 107 BNS were not made out, as the loco pilot's statement and postmortem report indicated the deceased committed suicide, not that the applicant abetted it. Ravi was released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court, not tamper with evidence, and not pressurize witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    As Fresh

    Vivek Varma

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Vivek VarmaView PDF

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/8507/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to applicant Ravi in a case involving charges under Sections 191(2) and 107 BNS (abetment of suicide). The court found that the essential ingredients of Section 107 BNS were not made out, as the loco pilot's statement and postmortem report indicated the deceased committed suicide, not that the applicant abetted it. Ravi was released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court, not tamper with evidence, and not pressurize witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case