SONU KUMAR URF CHOTU KUMAR vs State of Bihar Advocate - Jagdish Prasad sah — 264/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),317(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

Regular Bail

CNR: BRKT010015472026

Filing Number

1340/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

264/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Katihar

Judge

43-District and Additional Sessions Judge-V

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

17

Police Station

BARARI

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),317(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SONU KUMAR URF CHOTU KUMAR

    Adv. Anil kumar

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The District & Additional Sessions Judge granted bail to Sonu Kumar @ Chotu Kumar in case B.P. 264/2026, allowing his release on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. The court noted the petitioner had no prior criminal history, was in custody since January 19, 2026, and the case involved only production and seizure matters under BNS sections 303(2) and 317(2), relating to an alleged attempted theft of an irrigation motor pump. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-V

  4. 19-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-V

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Additional Sessions Judge-V

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 264/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The District & Additional Sessions Judge granted bail to Sonu Kumar @ Chotu Kumar in case B.P. 264/2026, allowing his release on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount each. The court noted the petitioner had no prior criminal history, was in custody since January 19, 2026, and the case involved only production and seizure matters under BNS sections 303(2) and 317(2), relating to an alleged attempted theft of an irrigation motor pump. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case