mahendra chaoudhary vs THE STATE OF BIHAR — 204/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,3(5),. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 01st April 2026.

CRI. BAIL APPLN

CNR: BRBE010013482026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

07-02-2026

Filing Number

1262/2026

Filing Date

07-02-2026

Registration No

204/2026

Registration Date

07-02-2026

Court

DJ Div. Begusarai

Judge

3-District and Addl. Session Judge-I

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

FIR Details

FIR Number

441

Police Station

TEGHRA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,3(5),

Petitioner(s)

mahendra chaoudhary

Adv. AKIL AHMAD

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF BIHAR

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District and Addl. Session Judge-I

01-04-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

HEARING

19-03-2026

HEARING

18-03-2026

HEARING

13-03-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

01-04-2026
Copy of Order

Summary: The court rejected the bail petition of Mahendra Choudhary and Raj Kumar Choudhary, who are accused of assaulting a rickshaw puller with lethal weapons, causing grievous injuries including a fractured rib. The judge found sufficient evidence in the form of direct allegations, medical reports showing two grievous injuries to vital body parts, and corroborating witness statements and the injured person's own statement, concluding the case against the accused is substantiated and the seriousness of the offence warrants continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the bail petition of Mahendra Choudhary and Raj Kumar Choudhary, who are accused of assaulting a rickshaw puller with lethal weapons, causing grievous injuries including a fractured rib. The judge found sufficient evidence in the form of direct allegations, medical reports showing two grievous injuries to vital body parts, and corroborating witness statements and the injured person's own statement, concluding the case against the accused is substantiated and the seriousness of the offence warrants continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DJ Div. Begusarai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case