Prabhu Yadav vs State of Bihar — 57/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 229. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Petition No. - Bail Petition

CNR: BRDA200001802026

Filing Number

178/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

57/2026

Registration Date

24-Feb-2026

Court

Biraul DJ Division

Judge

1-District Additional Sessions Judge

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

62

Police Station

Tilakeshwar P.S

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 229
Arms Act Section 25(1-b)a

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Prabhu Yadav

    Adv. GANGA SAGAR PASWAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Order

    The court allowed Prabhu Yadav's bail petition, granting him release on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. The court found that investigation was complete with charge-sheet already filed, Yadav had been in custody since January 28, 2026, and there was no material evidence suggesting he would abscond or tamper with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Additional Sessions Judge

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Order

    District Additional Sessions Judge

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District Additional Sessions Judge

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District Additional Sessions Judge

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  8. 25-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 24-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 57/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Prabhu Yadav's bail petition, granting him release on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. The court found that investigation was complete with charge-sheet already filed, Yadav had been in custody since January 28, 2026, and there was no material evidence suggesting he would abscond or tamper with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case