Rupak Kumar vs State of Bihar Advocate - Public Prosecutor — 500/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),338,336(3)340(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRNL010014332026

Filing Number

1247/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

500/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

Nalanda DJ Div.

Judge

4-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-VI

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

86

Police Station

RAJGIR

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),338,336(3)340(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rupak Kumar

    Adv. KAMLESH KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar Advocate - Public Prosecutor

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 500/2026 The court rejected petitioner Rupak Kumar's bail application in a CTET examination fraud case. Kumar was accused of paying Rs. 5,000 to have another person (Sunny Kumar) take the exam in his name on 07-02-2026. The prosecution presented evidence including biometric records, witness testimony, and a written confession from the co-accused, establishing serious charges under IPC sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), and 340(2). The court found the allegations grave and denied bail, concluding that releasing the petitioner on bail was inappropriate given the nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-VI

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-VI

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 500/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 500/2026 The court rejected petitioner Rupak Kumar's bail application in a CTET examination fraud case. Kumar was accused of paying Rs. 5,000 to have another person (Sunny Kumar) take the exam in his name on 07-02-2026. The prosecution presented evidence including biometric records, witness testimony, and a written confession from the co-accused, establishing serious charges under IPC sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), and 340(2). The court found the allegations grave and denied bail, concluding that releasing the petitioner on bail was inappropriate given the nature of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case