Sonu Chouhan vs State of Bihar — 484/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECT on 25th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRAU010025332026
e-Filing Number
24-02-2026
Filing Number
2315/2026
Filing Date
24-Feb-2026
Registration No
484/2026
Registration Date
24-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Division Aurangabad
Judge
3-District Addl. S J-I-cum special judge SC/ST and NDPS
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--REJECT
Last updated 14-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11
Police Station
Fesar
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sonu Chouhan
Adv. Anup Kumar Singh
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
Bail OrderView PDF
Case Summary: 484/2026 - Sonu Chouhan v. State of Bihar The District Sessions Judge rejected Sonu Chouhan's anticipatory bail application in a case involving charges under BNS sections 126, 115, 351, 109, 352 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act sections 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(r). The court found that while the petitioner contended the matter was a private dispute without SC/ST Act applicability, the prosecution established that the accused abused the victim using caste slur ("Chamar"), constituting an offense under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. The court held that anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is statutorily non-maintainable, and the accused's awareness of the victim's SC status precluded bail consideration under the express embargo of Section 18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Addl. S J-I-cum special judge SC/ST and NDPS
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Addl. S J-I-cum special judge SC/ST and NDPS
-
07-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Addl. S J-I-cum special judge SC/ST and NDPS
-
25-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 484/2026
Case Summary: 484/2026 - Sonu Chouhan v. State of Bihar The District Sessions Judge rejected Sonu Chouhan's anticipatory bail application in a case involving charges under BNS sections 126, 115, 351, 109, 352 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act sections 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(r). The court found that while the petitioner contended the matter was a private dispute without SC/ST Act applicability, the prosecution established that the accused abused the victim using caste slur ("Chamar"), constituting an offense under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. The court held that anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is statutorily non-maintainable, and the accused's awareness of the victim's SC status precluded bail consideration under the express embargo of Section 18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts