RAJU MAHTO vs State of Bihar — 1384/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 16th April 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BREC010046752026

Filing Number

4343/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

1384/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Motihari

Judge

1-Principal District and sessions Judge

Decision Date

16-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

7

Police Station

DARAPA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJU MAHTO

    Adv. MD IMTEYAZUL HAQUE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    Order By Court

    The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Raju Mahto and Shivkanti Devi, who were accused of murdering the informant's daughter in a dowry-related case under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient evidence in the FIR and case diary, including witness statements and recovered human remains, to support the charges, and deemed the gravity of the offense and ongoing investigation as grounds to deny pre-arrest bail despite the petitioners' lack of criminal antecedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1384/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Raju Mahto and Shivkanti Devi, who were accused of murdering the informant's daughter in a dowry-related case under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found sufficient evidence in the FIR and case diary, including witness statements and recovered human remains, to support the charges, and deemed the gravity of the offense and ongoing investigation as grounds to deny pre-arrest bail despite the petitioners' lack of criminal antecedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case