DEEPAK MAHTO vs State of Bihar — 389/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

Regular Bail

CNR: BREC010026352026

Filing Number

2430/2026

Filing Date

10-Feb-2026

Registration No

389/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Motihari

Judge

1-Principal District and sessions Judge

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 07-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

72

Police Station

BANJARIA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEEPAK MAHTO

    Adv. KANAHAIYA PD. SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Order By CourtView PDF

    Court Summary The Sessions Court of East Champaran granted bail to accused Deepak Mahato on March 17, 2026, in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 126(2), 303(2), 109, 74, 352, 351(2), 3/5, and 115. The court found that while serious allegations of group assault causing injury existed, the matter had been settled between both parties, no prior criminal history was recorded, and the accused had been in custody since January 26, 2026. Bail was approved upon furnishing a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties on the condition of cooperation during investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  6. 21-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  7. 12-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 10-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 389/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Sessions Court of East Champaran granted bail to accused Deepak Mahato on March 17, 2026, in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 126(2), 303(2), 109, 74, 352, 351(2), 3/5, and 115. The court found that while serious allegations of group assault causing injury existed, the matter had been settled between both parties, no prior criminal history was recorded, and the accused had been in custody since January 26, 2026. Bail was approved upon furnishing a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties on the condition of cooperation during investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case