SHIVANSH PANDEY @ SHIVANK PANDEY vs STATE OF U.P. Advocate - G.A. — BAIL/8578/2026

Disposed: -- on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 20-Mar-2026

CNR: UPHC011385372026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

BAIL/8578/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Judge

Rajiv Lochan Shukla

Coram

Rajiv Lochan Shukla

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

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 30-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHIVANSH PANDEY @ SHIVANK PANDEY

    Adv. ANIL KUMAR

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Rajiv Lochan ShuklaView PDF

    The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Shivansh Pandey in a case involving charges under BNS Sections 140(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), and 3(5). The court found that the applicant had no specific role assigned in the FIR, the injured party suffered no grievous injury, and a similarly situated co-accused (Azahar) had already been granted bail. Bail was granted on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, regular court attendance, and non-intimidation of witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    —

    Harvir Singh

  4. 20-Apr-2026

    Harvir SinghView PDF

  5. 20-Apr-2026

    —

    Harvir Singh

  6. 10-Apr-2026

    —

    Harvir Singh

  7. 03-Apr-2026

    —

    Harvir Singh

  8. 28-Mar-2026

    —

    Santosh Rai

  9. 20-Mar-2026

    Santosh RaiView PDF

  10. 20-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/8578/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Shivansh Pandey in a case involving charges under BNS Sections 140(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), and 3(5). The court found that the applicant had no specific role assigned in the FIR, the injured party suffered no grievous injury, and a similarly situated co-accused (Azahar) had already been granted bail. Bail was granted on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence, regular court attendance, and non-intimidation of 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