RADHESHYAM MAHTO vs State of Bihar — 530/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th March 2026.
Regular Bail
CNR: BREC010036882026
Filing Number
3423/2026
Filing Date
23-Feb-2026
Registration No
530/2026
Registration Date
24-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Div. Motihari
Judge
1-Principal District and sessions Judge
Decision Date
18-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 22-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
483
Police Station
RAXAUL
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RADHESHYAM MAHTO
Adv. RAJNI KANT PRASAD
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Mar-2026
Order By CourtView PDF
Case 530/2026 Summary: The Sessions Judge granted bail to Radheshyam Mahto, accused of motorcycle theft under IPC Section 303(2), noting that the accused was not named in the FIR (which was registered against unknown persons), was not apprehended at the crime scene, no incriminating material was recovered from him, and the charge carries a maximum sentence of less than seven years. The court released him on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of the same amount, conditioned on his cooperation in the trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District and sessions Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and sessions Judge
-
07-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and sessions Judge
-
25-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 530/2026
Case 530/2026 Summary: The Sessions Judge granted bail to Radheshyam Mahto, accused of motorcycle theft under IPC Section 303(2), noting that the accused was not named in the FIR (which was registered against unknown persons), was not apprehended at the crime scene, no incriminating material was recovered from him, and the charge carries a maximum sentence of less than seven years. The court released him on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of the same amount, conditioned on his cooperation in the trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts