RAJIV KUMAR vs THE STATE OF BIHAR — 42/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438,440. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Revision

CNR: BRBE010022812026

Filing Number

2135/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

42/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Begusarai

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 17-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

77

Police Station

BEGUSARAI TOWN

Year

2017

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438,440

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJIV KUMAR

    Adv. SHASHI BHUSHAN JHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge dismissed the criminal revision petition, upholding the magistrate's rejection of repeated Section 311 Cr.PC petitions filed by the informant/revisionist. The court found that despite being granted multiple opportunities over one year to present evidence (witness examinations on specific dates), the informant failed to utilize them effectively, constituting an abuse of process and dilatory tactics that prejudiced the accused parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing On Addmission

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing On Addmission

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing On Addmission

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 42/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge dismissed the criminal revision petition, upholding the magistrate's rejection of repeated Section 311 Cr.PC petitions filed by the informant/revisionist. The court found that despite being granted multiple opportunities over one year to present evidence (witness examinations on specific dates), the informant failed to utilize them effectively, constituting an abuse of process and dilatory tactics that prejudiced the accused parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case