MD SAJJAD vs State of Bihar — 336/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 191(2),190,126(2),115(2),324(4),109,303(2),352,351(2). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRDA010017942026

Filing Number

1659/2026

Filing Date

20-Feb-2026

Registration No

336/2026

Registration Date

20-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Darbhanga

Judge

2-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 25-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

96

Police Station

BHALPATTI

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 191(2),190,126(2),115(2),324(4),109,303(2),352,351(2)
Arms Act Section 27

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MD SAJJAD

    Adv. AFROZ ALAM KHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    The District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Darbhanga, rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Md. Sajjad in a case involving alleged armed assault, building demolition, and looting of a fire safety institute. The court found the charges grave based on witness corroboration, recovery of pellets, seizure of JCB machines, the informant's injury report, and the petitioner's prior criminal record, deeming him undeserving of pre-arrest bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  6. 07-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 21-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 20-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 336/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Darbhanga, rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Md. Sajjad in a case involving alleged armed assault, building demolition, and looting of a fire safety institute. The court found the charges grave based on witness corroboration, recovery of pellets, seizure of JCB machines, the informant's injury report, and the petitioner's prior criminal record, deeming him undeserving of pre-arrest bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case