JUGUL KISHOR CHAUDHARY vs State of Bihar — 709/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115,2,109,1,126,2,351,2,351,3,352,3/5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th June 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRGO010044302026
Filing Number
4212/2026
Filing Date
24-Mar-2026
Registration No
709/2026
Registration Date
24-Mar-2026
Court
DJ Div. Gopalganj
Judge
24-ADJ-IX
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 11-Jul-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
54
Police Station
PHULWARIA
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JUGUL KISHOR CHAUDHARY
Adv. RAJESH KUMAR RAI
-
2.KISNAWATI DEVI
-
3.SALONI KUMARI
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Order
Case 709/2026 Summary The court granted anticipatory bail to the three petitioners (Jugul Kishor Chaudhary, Kisnawati Devi, and Saloni Kumari) in a land dispute case involving allegations of assault and theft. The court found the case involved mutual accusations between two parties, with the petitioners being informants in a related earlier case, and determined there were no specific allegations against them individually. Crucially, the court allowed bail due to the prosecution's failure to submit an injury report, which prevented determination of the injury's nature; the court also issued a show-cause notice to the Civil Surgeon for non-compliance with court orders. Bail was set at Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
Disposed
ADJ-IX
-
27-May-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
ADJ-IX
-
20-May-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
ADJ-IX
-
11-May-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
ADJ-IX
-
23-Apr-2026
Awaiting for Case Diary
District and Sessions Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 709/2026
Case 709/2026 Summary The court granted anticipatory bail to the three petitioners (Jugul Kishor Chaudhary, Kisnawati Devi, and Saloni Kumari) in a land dispute case involving allegations of assault and theft. The court found the case involved mutual accusations between two parties, with the petitioners being informants in a related earlier case, and determined there were no specific allegations against them individually. Crucially, the court allowed bail due to the prosecution's failure to submit an injury report, which prevented determination of the injury's nature; the court also issued a show-cause notice to the Civil Surgeon for non-compliance with court orders. Bail was set at Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts