Babu Lal Yadav vs State of Bihar — 141/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,303(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

B P - Regular Bail

CNR: BRKM010022602026

Filing Number

2050/2026

Filing Date

17-Mar-2026

Registration No

141/2026

Registration Date

17-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Bhabhua

Judge

1-Principal Distt and Sess Judge

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

128

Police Station

BHABHUA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,303(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Babu Lal Yadav

    Adv. Ritesh Kumar Pathak

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    Case Summary: The Sessions Judge granted bail to Babu Lal Yadav, accused of assault and theft under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, and 303(2), finding that the charge under Section 109 lacked sufficient evidence and the theft allegations were vague. The court considered that the victim's injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt force, the remaining charges were bailable, and the petitioner's custody period had been adequate, ordering his release on Rs. 10,000 bail with two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Distt and Sess Judge

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal Distt and Sess Judge

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal Distt and Sess Judge

  6. 04-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal Distt and Sess Judge

  7. 28-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal Distt and Sess Judge

  8. 18-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 17-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 141/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Sessions Judge granted bail to Babu Lal Yadav, accused of assault and theft under BNS sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, and 303(2), finding that the charge under Section 109 lacked sufficient evidence and the theft allegations were vague. The court considered that the victim's injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt force, the remaining charges were bailable, and the petitioner's custody period had been adequate, ordering his release on Rs. 10,000 bail with two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case