NITISH PANDIT ALIAS NITISH KUMAR PANDIT vs STATE OF BIHAR — 215/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498A,323. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NON-MAINTAINABLE on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

ANTICIPATORY BAIL

CNR: BRJA010009382026

Filing Number

860/2026

Filing Date

10-Feb-2026

Registration No

215/2026

Registration Date

10-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Jamui

Judge

3-District And Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NON-MAINTAINABLE

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1253

Police Station

COMPLAINT CASE

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 498A,323

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NITISH PANDIT ALIAS NITISH KUMAR PANDIT

    Adv. CHANDRIKA PANDIT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Bail OrderView PDF

    Summary: The District & Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui dismissed Nitish Pandit's anticipatory bail petition as not maintainable in a case registered under IPC sections 498(A) and 323 (domestic violence and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that since process under CrPC sections 82 and 83 had already been issued against the petitioner, the anticipatory bail application could not be entertained. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District And Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui

  4. 24-Feb-2026

    Hearing.

    District And Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui

  5. 13-Feb-2026

    Hearing.

    District And Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 10-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 215/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The District & Additional Sessions Judge II, Jamui dismissed Nitish Pandit's anticipatory bail petition as not maintainable in a case registered under IPC sections 498(A) and 323 (domestic violence and voluntarily causing hurt). The court found that since process under CrPC sections 82 and 83 had already been issued against the petitioner, the anticipatory bail application could not be entertained. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case