Raghunath Kharwar vs State of Bihar — 254/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,148,149,323,307,504,506. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 26th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRBU100015112026
e-Filing Number
25-02-2026
Filing Number
1320/2026
Filing Date
25-02-2026
Registration No
254/2026
Registration Date
25-02-2026
Court
DJ Div. Buxar
Judge
7-Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge III
Decision Date
26th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
367
Police Station
DUMRAON
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Raghunath Kharwar
Adv. Santosh Kumar Sinha
Prabhunath Kharwar
Adv. Santosh Kumar Sinha
Respondent(s)
State of Bihar
Hearing History
Judge: 7-Dist. and Addl. Ses. Judge III
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 26-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 10-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 27-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 26-02-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The District and Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar, granted anticipatory bail to accused Raghunath Kharwar and Prabhunath Kharwar in a case involving serious charges of rioting, attempted murder, and criminal intimidation (IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504, 506). The court found that the accused had no prior criminal history, the FIR was filed with significant delay without clear justification, and a counter-case had already been registered against the informant, suggesting the original complaint may be motivated by money rather than genuine grievance. The court approved their interim bail with a bond of ₹10,000 each and two sureties of equal amount, subject to their cooperation under CrPC Section 482(2). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The District and Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar, granted anticipatory bail to accused Raghunath Kharwar and Prabhunath Kharwar in a case involving serious charges of rioting, attempted murder, and criminal intimidation (IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504, 506). The court found that the accused had no prior criminal history, the FIR was filed with significant delay without clear justification, and a counter-case had already been registered against the informant, suggesting the original complaint may be motivated by money rather than genuine grievance. The court approved their interim bail with a bond of ₹10,000 each and two sureties of equal amount, subject to their cooperation under CrPC Section 482(2). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts