ANAVESH MAURYA ALIAS ANAVESH KUMAR vs State of Bihar — 702/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BREC010021642026

Filing Number

2000/2026

Filing Date

02-Feb-2026

Registration No

702/2026

Registration Date

03-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Motihari

Judge

1-Principal District and sessions Judge

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 07-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1259

Police Station

MOTIHARI TOWN/NAGAR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ANAVESH MAURYA ALIAS ANAVESH KUMAR

    Adv. SUMIT KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Order By Court

    The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Anavesh Maurya, who was accused of selling the informant's hardware goods worth Rs. 15 lakh to other shops without authorization under sections 306 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient material on record, including the co-accused's confession and recovery of stolen goods, to deny pre-arrest bail despite the petitioner's clean criminal record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  6. 05-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 702/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Anavesh Maurya, who was accused of selling the informant's hardware goods worth Rs. 15 lakh to other shops without authorization under sections 306 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient material on record, including the co-accused's confession and recovery of stolen goods, to deny pre-arrest bail despite the petitioner's clean criminal record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case