Rana Pratap Singh Alias Ram Pratap Singh vs State of Bihar — 198/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 69. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 07th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRBU100011232026
e-Filing Number
11-02-2026
Filing Number
967/2026
Filing Date
11-Feb-2026
Registration No
198/2026
Registration Date
11-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Div. Buxar
Judge
3-Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge I
Decision Date
07-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 04-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
665
Police Station
BUXAR TOWN
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rana Pratap Singh Alias Ram Pratap Singh
Adv. Barmeshwar Singh
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-Mar-2026
Copy of orderView PDF
The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Rana Pratap Singh, accused under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, for allegedly deceiving a woman and establishing physical relations under false promise of marriage. The court found the prosecution case supported by witnesses, medical evidence (abortion pills), audio recordings, CDR records showing 207 conversations, and the serious nature of the offense warranting imprisonment up to 10 years, making bail unjustifiable at this investigative stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-Mar-2026
Disposed
Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge I
-
23-Feb-2026
Copy of orderView PDF
-
23-Feb-2026
Hearing
Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge I
-
16-Feb-2026
Hearing
Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge I
-
13-Feb-2026
Hearing
Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge I
-
12-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 198/2026
The court rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Rana Pratap Singh, accused under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, for allegedly deceiving a woman and establishing physical relations under false promise of marriage. The court found the prosecution case supported by witnesses, medical evidence (abortion pills), audio recordings, CDR records showing 207 conversations, and the serious nature of the offense warranting imprisonment up to 10 years, making bail unjustifiable at this investigative stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts