SURESH YADAV vs State of Bihar — 590/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 116,2,115,2,109,308,2,352,352,351,3. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 16th April 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRGO010036812026

Filing Number

3498/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

590/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Gopalganj

Judge

11-ADJ-II

Decision Date

16-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

353

Police Station

HATHUA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 116,2,115,2,109,308,2,352,352,351,3

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURESH YADAV

    Adv. RAJKISHOR YADAV

  2. 2.CHAMPA DEVI

  3. 3.SUNIL KUMAR YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The District and Additional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj, rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Suresh Yadav, Champa Devi, and Sunil Kumar Yadav in a case involving alleged assault with bricks on the informant's head. The court found the offence serious in nature, noting the injury to a sensitive area of the brain suggesting intent to kill, and observed pending matrimonial disputes; consequently, the petitioners were directed to surrender and seek regular bail instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ-II

  4. 13-Apr-2026

    Awaiting for Case Diary

    ADJ-II

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Awaiting for Case Diary

    ADJ-II

  6. 23-Mar-2026

    Awaiting for Case Diary

    ADJ-II

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Awaiting for Case Diary

    ADJ-II

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 590/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The District and Additional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj, rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Suresh Yadav, Champa Devi, and Sunil Kumar Yadav in a case involving alleged assault with bricks on the informant's head. The court found the offence serious in nature, noting the injury to a sensitive area of the brain suggesting intent to kill, and observed pending matrimonial disputes; consequently, the petitioners were directed to surrender and seek regular bail instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case