Suday Yadav alias Suday Kumar vs State of Bihar — 290/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 140(3),61(2),238,140(1),103(1). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 19th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRJE010015072026
Filing Number
1345/2026
Filing Date
13-Feb-2026
Registration No
290/2026
Registration Date
13-Feb-2026
Court
Jehanabad DJ Div
Judge
3-Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
Decision Date
19-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 18-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
337
Police Station
JEHANABAD
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Suday Yadav alias Suday Kumar
Adv. Sanjay Kumar Chaoudhary
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary: The court rejected the accused Suday Yadav Urf Suday Kumar's bail application in a case involving charges under IPC sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1), and 238, relating to kidnapping and murder. The court found credible evidence of the accused's involvement, including that Rs. 50,000 was transferred through co-accused Ravi Ratan to the accused on the same day as the alleged crime, suggesting complicity in the offense. Given the serious nature of the charges and prima facie evidence of guilt, the court deemed bail inappropriate and dismissed the application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
-
17-Mar-2026
Hearing
Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
-
11-Mar-2026
Hearing
Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
-
27-Feb-2026
Hearing
Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
-
17-Feb-2026
Hearing
Addl. District and Sessions Judge-I
-
16-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 290/2026
Summary: The court rejected the accused Suday Yadav Urf Suday Kumar's bail application in a case involving charges under IPC sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1), and 238, relating to kidnapping and murder. The court found credible evidence of the accused's involvement, including that Rs. 50,000 was transferred through co-accused Ravi Ratan to the accused on the same day as the alleged crime, suggesting complicity in the offense. Given the serious nature of the charges and prima facie evidence of guilt, the court deemed bail inappropriate and dismissed the application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts