PANCHANAND MANDAL vs State of Bihar Advocate - Jagdish Prasad sah — 36/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,351(2),(3),352,3/5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRKT010001802026

Filing Number

143/2026

Filing Date

09-Jan-2026

Registration No

36/2026

Registration Date

09-Jan-2026

Court

DJ Div. Katihar

Judge

10-District and Additional Sessions Judge-IX

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 17-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

143

Police Station

DANDKHORA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109,351(2),(3),352,3/5

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PANCHANAND MANDAL

    Adv. Yoganand Singh

  2. 2.PINKI DEVI

  3. 3.RAHUL KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar Advocate - Jagdish Prasad sah

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary The court granted anticipatory bail to the accused in a case involving alleged criminal intimidation and voluntary causing hurt (IPC Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2)(3), 352, 3(5)). The court found that the parties are close relatives who have amicably settled their dispute through village elders' mediation, with no criminal history of the accused, and the victim's injury was assessed as simple/minor by medical examination, making the case bailable in nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-IX

  4. 25-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-IX

  5. 10-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-IX

  6. 16-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-IX

  7. 12-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 09-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 36/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court granted anticipatory bail to the accused in a case involving alleged criminal intimidation and voluntary causing hurt (IPC Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2)(3), 352, 3(5)). The court found that the parties are close relatives who have amicably settled their dispute through village elders' mediation, with no criminal history of the accused, and the victim's injury was assessed as simple/minor by medical examination, making the case bailable in nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case