RAJ KUMAR ALIAS RAJU vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A. — NABAIL/2349/2026

Case under Asiatic Society Act Section 3,62-3. Disposed: -- on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC011348202026

Filing Number

NABAIL/

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

NABAIL/2349/2026

Registration Date

28-Feb-2026

Judge

Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar (Judicial)

Coram

Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar (Judicial)

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

ABAIL MINOR ( 64 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 30-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Asiatic Society Act Section 3,62-3

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJ KUMAR ALIAS RAJU

    Adv. SHIVAM YADAV,ADITYA YADAV,ADITYA YADAV, ,UMA YADAV,ADITYA YADAV

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar (Judicial)View PDF

    The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Raj Kumar alias Raju, who was accused of participating in a road blockade and protest demonstration involving 150-200 persons against the non-recovery of two drowned bodies. The court found the case for anticipatory bail justified, noting no injuries or property damage occurred and considering the applicant's undertaking to cooperate with investigation. Bail was granted on Rs. 50,000 personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, court appearance, and prohibition from leaving India without permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    —

    Rajiv Lochan Shukla

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. NABAIL/2349/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Raj Kumar alias Raju, who was accused of participating in a road blockade and protest demonstration involving 150-200 persons against the non-recovery of two drowned bodies. The court found the case for anticipatory bail justified, noting no injuries or property damage occurred and considering the applicant's undertaking to cooperate with investigation. Bail was granted on Rs. 50,000 personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, court appearance, and prohibition from leaving India without permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case