BHARAT YADAV vs STATE OF BIHAR — 97/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRKI010005392026

Filing Number

482/2026

Filing Date

16-Feb-2026

Registration No

97/2026

Registration Date

16-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Kishanganj

Judge

2-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 02-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

41

Police Station

VISHANPUR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHARAT YADAV

    Adv. SHAMIM AHMAD

  2. 2.ARUN YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Copy of document.View PDF

    The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Bharat Yadav and Arun Yadav in a theft case involving Rs. 2,00,000 stolen from a motorcycle. The court found sufficient evidence against them, including CCTV footage identifying them and recovery of the stolen amount from petitioner Yadav's house, and considered their criminal histories (one prior case for Bharat, three for Arun) as grounds to deny anticipatory bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 02-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 16-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 97/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Bharat Yadav and Arun Yadav in a theft case involving Rs. 2,00,000 stolen from a motorcycle. The court found sufficient evidence against them, including CCTV footage identifying them and recovery of the stolen amount from petitioner Yadav's house, and considered their criminal histories (one prior case for Bharat, three for Arun) as grounds to deny anticipatory bail protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case