MUKESH KUMAR vs STATE OF BIHAR — 218/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 310(4), 310(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 30th March 2026.

Case disposed

Regular Bail

CNR: BRMP010014412026

Filing Number

1358/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

218/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Madhepura

Judge

22-I/c District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

Decision Date

30-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

471

Police Station

BIHARI GANJ

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 310(4), 310(5)
Arms Act Section 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUKESH KUMAR

    Adv. RISHI KESH KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Mar-2026

    Copy of Order

    The court granted regular bail to accused Mukesh Kumar in case B.P. No. 218/2026 (Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 471/2025), setting bail at Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, after finding insufficient incriminating evidence against him despite charges under IPC sections 310(4), 310(5), and Arms Act provisions. The court noted the accused had been in judicial custody since February 6, 2026, and considered that his name appeared in the case record only through co-accused statements, with no recoveries made from his possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    I/c District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

  4. 19-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    I/c District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    I/c District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 218/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted regular bail to accused Mukesh Kumar in case B.P. No. 218/2026 (Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 471/2025), setting bail at Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, after finding insufficient incriminating evidence against him despite charges under IPC sections 310(4), 310(5), and Arms Act provisions. The court noted the accused had been in judicial custody since February 6, 2026, and considered that his name appeared in the case record only through co-accused statements, with no recoveries made from his possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case