RAMMANI KUMAR ALIAS RISHI KUMAR vs State of Bihar — 582/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 191(2),191(3),190,103(1),109. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRBJ010032972026

Filing Number

2596/2026

Filing Date

21-Feb-2026

Registration No

582/2026

Registration Date

21-Feb-2026

Court

Bhojpur DJ Division

Judge

4-Distt. and Addl. S.J -IV

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 18-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

376

Police Station

UDWANT NAGAR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 191(2),191(3),190,103(1),109
Arms Act Section 27

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAMMANI KUMAR ALIAS RISHI KUMAR

    Adv. KAMLESH KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Rammani Kumar (also known as Rishi Kumar) who was accused of involvement in a fatal assault case where one person died. The court found that witness statements, the inquest report, and the post-mortem report sufficiently supported the prosecution's case, and that the seriousness of the charges—including firing weapons and using blunt instruments to cause fatal injuries—warranted denial of anticipatory bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Distt. and Addl. S.J -IV

  4. 25-Feb-2026

    Awaiting for L. C. R.

    Distt. and Addl. S.J -IV

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 21-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 582/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Rammani Kumar (also known as Rishi Kumar) who was accused of involvement in a fatal assault case where one person died. The court found that witness statements, the inquest report, and the post-mortem report sufficiently supported the prosecution's case, and that the seriousness of the charges—including firing weapons and using blunt instruments to cause fatal injuries—warranted denial of anticipatory bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case