MITHILESH KUMAR vs State of Bihar — 328/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 16th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BREC010008762026
Filing Number
794/2026
Filing Date
16-Jan-2026
Registration No
328/2026
Registration Date
17-Jan-2026
Court
DJ Div. Motihari
Judge
3-District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 07-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
196
Police Station
PATAHI
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MITHILESH KUMAR
Adv. AWADHESH KUMAR SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
Order By Court
Summary: The District & Additional Sessions Judge-1, East Champaran, rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Mithilesh Kumar, who was accused of kidnapping a minor girl for marriage purposes under BNS sections 137(2), 87, and 3(5). The court found the allegations serious in nature, noting that investigation witnesses corroborated the FIR, the victim (a minor) stated the petitioner forcibly took her to Bangalore, and the gravity of the offense precluded granting bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
10-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
27-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
26-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
19-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
09-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
06-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
20-Jan-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st
-
19-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 328/2026
Summary: The District & Additional Sessions Judge-1, East Champaran, rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Mithilesh Kumar, who was accused of kidnapping a minor girl for marriage purposes under BNS sections 137(2), 87, and 3(5). The court found the allegations serious in nature, noting that investigation witnesses corroborated the FIR, the victim (a minor) stated the petitioner forcibly took her to Bangalore, and the gravity of the offense precluded granting bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts