LAXMAN PANDIT vs State of Bihar — 399/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 21st April 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BREC010011152026
Filing Number
1012/2026
Filing Date
19-Jan-2026
Registration No
399/2026
Registration Date
20-Jan-2026
Court
DJ Div. Motihari
Judge
4-District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
Decision Date
21-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 07-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
134
Police Station
KOTWA
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.LAXMAN PANDIT
Adv. SUJIT KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
21-Apr-2026
Order By Court
Summary The court rejected Laxman Pandit's anticipatory bail petition in a kidnapping case involving a minor girl under IPC sections 363, 366-A, 506, 34 and POCSO Act sections 8/12. The court found direct and specific allegations against the petitioner, noting that the victim girl (DOB: 12.06.2007) named him in her statement and that a minor's consent is legally invalid; investigation is ongoing and the gravity of offences makes bail unsuitable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
21-Apr-2026
Disposed
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
17-Apr-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
06-Apr-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
25-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
18-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
10-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
25-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
11-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
31-Jan-2026
Hearing
District and Addl. Sessions Judge 6th
-
21-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 399/2026
Summary The court rejected Laxman Pandit's anticipatory bail petition in a kidnapping case involving a minor girl under IPC sections 363, 366-A, 506, 34 and POCSO Act sections 8/12. The court found direct and specific allegations against the petitioner, noting that the victim girl (DOB: 12.06.2007) named him in her statement and that a minor's consent is legally invalid; investigation is ongoing and the gravity of offences makes bail unsuitable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts