Anandi Singh Alias Abhai Kishore Singh Alias Anandkishore Singh vs State of Bihar — 18/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 09th April 2026.
Cri. Rev App. - CRI. REVISION
CNR: BRAU010014162026
Filing Number
1285/2026
Filing Date
31-01-2026
Registration No
18/2026
Registration Date
31-01-2026
Court
DJ Division Aurangabad
Judge
1-Principal District And Sessions Judge
Decision Date
09th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Anandi Singh Alias Abhai Kishore Singh Alias Anandkishore Singh
Adv. vijay kumar singh
Respondent(s)
State of Bihar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District And Sessions Judge
Disposed
ORDER
Hearing On Addmission
Hearing On Addmission
Hearing On Addmission
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 26-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 12-03-2026 | Hearing On Addmission |
| 17-02-2026 | Hearing On Addmission |
| 09-02-2026 | Hearing On Addmission |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Aurangabad allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the lower court's order dated 13.10.2022 that had taken cognizance and issued processes against the revisionist under IPC sections 144, 448, 436 and Arms Act Section 27. The court found the lower court's order suffered from manifest infirmities as it proceeded mechanically without proper service of summons, no service reports, or execution records—violating mandatory procedural safeguards under the Cr.P.C. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration with due compliance of all procedural requirements and adequate opportunity to the revisionist. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Aurangabad allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the lower court's order dated 13.10.2022 that had taken cognizance and issued processes against the revisionist under IPC sections 144, 448, 436 and Arms Act Section 27. The court found the lower court's order suffered from manifest infirmities as it proceeded mechanically without proper service of summons, no service reports, or execution records—violating mandatory procedural safeguards under the Cr.P.C. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration with due compliance of all procedural requirements and adequate opportunity to the revisionist. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts