CHINTU KUMAR vs State of Bihar — 395/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 309(4). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 11th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRBJ010024022026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1775/2026
Filing Date
04-02-2026
Registration No
395/2026
Registration Date
04-02-2026
Court
Bhojpur DJ Division
Judge
1-Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
349
Police Station
ARRAH MUFFASSIL
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
CHINTU KUMAR
Adv. ASHOK KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Respondent(s)
State of Bihar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
Disposed
Awaiting for Case Diary
Awaiting for Case Diary
Awaiting for Case Diary
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Awaiting for Case Diary | |
| 23-02-2026 | Awaiting for Case Diary | |
| 07-02-2026 | Awaiting for Case Diary |
Final Orders / Judgements
The District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur granted anticipatory bail to 19-year-old Chintu Kumar in a armed robbery case, finding that he was implicated solely based on the confessional statement of co-accused Vishal Kumar, which is inadmissible under Section 22 of BSA, 2023, and that the petitioner was never identified by the informant during police identification proceedings. The bail was granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation and no tampering with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur granted anticipatory bail to 19-year-old Chintu Kumar in a armed robbery case, finding that he was implicated solely based on the confessional statement of co-accused Vishal Kumar, which is inadmissible under Section 22 of BSA, 2023, and that the petitioner was never identified by the informant during police identification proceedings. The bail was granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation and no tampering with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts