RAJESH PASWAN vs STATE Advocate - Hira Lal Singh — 30/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2)115(2),109(1),74352,351(2). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 25th March 2026.
A. B. P. - Anticipatory Bail Application
CNR: BRBA010001312026
e-Filing Number
07-01-2026
Filing Number
119/2026
Filing Date
07-01-2026
Registration No
30/2026
Registration Date
07-01-2026
Court
DJ Div. Banka
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
FIR Details
FIR Number
871
Police Station
AMARPUR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJESH PASWAN
Adv. Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh
NEERAJ PASWAN
Adv. Anand deo choudhary
SHEKHAR PASWAN
Adv. Anand deo choudhary
Respondent(s)
STATE Advocate - Hira Lal Singh
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 28-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 23-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 12-02-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Sessions Judge, Banka dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of three accused (Rajesh, Neeraj, and Shekhar Paswan) charged with assault, molestation, and criminal intimidation under BNS Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 74, 352, 351(2), and 3/5. The court found specific allegations of assault with iron rods corroborated by injury reports showing a deep cutting wound on the victim's forehead, rejecting the defense argument that the dispute was mutual, and held that the gravity of injuries warranted denial of pre-arrest bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Sessions Judge, Banka dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of three accused (Rajesh, Neeraj, and Shekhar Paswan) charged with assault, molestation, and criminal intimidation under BNS Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 74, 352, 351(2), and 3/5. The court found specific allegations of assault with iron rods corroborated by injury reports showing a deep cutting wound on the victim's forehead, rejecting the defense argument that the dispute was mutual, and held that the gravity of injuries warranted denial of pre-arrest bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts