JITENDRA KUMAR vs STATE OF BIHAR — 205/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 316(2),318(4),308(2),352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 12th March 2026.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL
CNR: BRJA010009032026
Filing Number
829/2026
Filing Date
07-Feb-2026
Registration No
205/2026
Registration Date
07-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Div. Jamui
Judge
2-District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 23-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
242
Police Station
LAKSHMIPUR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JITENDRA KUMAR
Adv. SOURAV KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF BIHAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
Bail OrderView PDF
The Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui rejected the interim bail application of Jitendra Kumar under Section 482 CrPC, holding that under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, Section 18, advance bail is not legally permissible for serious offenses under this Act. The accused was charged with criminal offenses and atrocity-related crimes, and the court found the prosecution's evidence credible regarding the alleged misappropriation of ₹4 lakhs for a tractor sale. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
-
06-Mar-2026
Hearing.
District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
-
25-Feb-2026
Hearing.
District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
-
21-Feb-2026
Hearing.
District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
-
11-Feb-2026
Hearing.
District And Additional Sessions Judge I, Jamui
-
10-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 205/2026
The Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui rejected the interim bail application of Jitendra Kumar under Section 482 CrPC, holding that under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, Section 18, advance bail is not legally permissible for serious offenses under this Act. The accused was charged with criminal offenses and atrocity-related crimes, and the court found the prosecution's evidence credible regarding the alleged misappropriation of ₹4 lakhs for a tractor sale. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts