VISHWANATH TANTI AND SEVEN OTHERS vs STATE OF BIHAR — 207/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),126(2),117(2),303(2),351(2),352,3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL
CNR: BRJA010009052026
Filing Number
831/2026
Filing Date
07-02-2026
Registration No
207/2026
Registration Date
07-02-2026
Court
DJ Div. Jamui
Judge
8-District And Additional Sessions Judge III, Jamui
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
136
Police Station
LACHHUAR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VISHWANATH TANTI AND SEVEN OTHERS
Adv. MUKESH KUMAR
SAHEB TANTI ALIAS GORELAL TANTI
RAJO TANTI
ANUP KUMAR
NITISH KUMAR
MANOJ TANTI
NAGINA DEVI
KANTI DEVI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF BIHAR
Hearing History
Judge: 8-District And Additional Sessions Judge III, Jamui
Disposed
HEARING.
HEARING.
HEARING.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-02-2026 | HEARING. |
| 21-02-2026 | HEARING. |
| 10-02-2026 | HEARING. |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court granted anticipatory bail to eight accused persons in a case registered under IPC sections 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, and 3(5) arising from a violent altercation on 29.10.2025 in Jamui district. The court found that the evidence presented does not clearly establish specific charges against the accused and that both sides filed counter-cases relating to the same incident, noting that no witness testimony had yet conclusively identified who injured whom or where injuries were inflicted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court granted anticipatory bail to eight accused persons in a case registered under IPC sections 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, and 3(5) arising from a violent altercation on 29.10.2025 in Jamui district. The court found that the evidence presented does not clearly establish specific charges against the accused and that both sides filed counter-cases relating to the same incident, noting that no witness testimony had yet conclusively identified who injured whom or where injuries were inflicted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts