YASHPAL KUMAR vs STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, GAYA — 628/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),316(5),317(2),318(4),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 19th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRGA010027422026
Filing Number
2604/2026
Filing Date
11-Feb-2026
Registration No
628/2026
Registration Date
11-Feb-2026
Court
Gaya DJ Div.
Judge
5-District and Additional Sessions Judge-II
Decision Date
19-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 07-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
105
Police Station
Aati
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.YASHPAL KUMAR
Adv. MUKESH KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, GAYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge-II, Gaya rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Yashpal Kumar, who was accused of transporting over 1,300 kg of rice allocated for mid-day meals at two schools. The court found the allegations serious, characterizing the act as a social crime and moral turpitude, and determined that the petitioner's involvement as the vehicle driver combined with lack of valid documentation warranted denial of bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-Mar-2026
Disposed
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II
-
16-Mar-2026
Bail Matters
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II
-
10-Mar-2026
Bail Matters
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II
-
19-Feb-2026
Bail Matters
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II
-
17-Feb-2026
Bail Matters
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
13-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 628/2026
Summary: The Additional Sessions Judge-II, Gaya rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Yashpal Kumar, who was accused of transporting over 1,300 kg of rice allocated for mid-day meals at two schools. The court found the allegations serious, characterizing the act as a social crime and moral turpitude, and determined that the petitioner's involvement as the vehicle driver combined with lack of valid documentation warranted denial of bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts