UPENDRA KUMAR ALIAS UPENDRA PASWAN vs State of Bihar — 852/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 103(1),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 07th April 2026.
Regular Bail
CNR: BRBJ010038622026
Filing Number
3114/2026
Filing Date
07-Mar-2026
Registration No
852/2026
Registration Date
07-Mar-2026
Court
Bhojpur DJ Division
Judge
1-Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
Decision Date
07-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 25-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
80
Police Station
DHOBAHA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.UPENDRA KUMAR ALIAS UPENDRA PASWAN
Adv. MUKTESHWAR SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
The District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur dismissed the bail petition of Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Paswan, who is accused of causing the death of his wife Baby Kumari through beating and throttling under BNS Section 103(1). The court found a prima facie case against the petitioner, noting that all prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution's case, the investigation was still ongoing, and there was a genuine risk of witness tampering, making continued custody necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
04-Apr-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
02-Apr-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
26-Mar-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
23-Mar-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
Principal Dist. and Ses. Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 852/2026
The District & Sessions Judge, Bhojpur dismissed the bail petition of Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Paswan, who is accused of causing the death of his wife Baby Kumari through beating and throttling under BNS Section 103(1). The court found a prima facie case against the petitioner, noting that all prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution's case, the investigation was still ongoing, and there was a genuine risk of witness tampering, making continued custody necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts