JITU ALLIAS GAURAV KUMAR vs State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH — 135/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRNL100002532026

Filing Number

248/2026

Filing Date

02-Feb-2026

Registration No

135/2026

Registration Date

02-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Hilsa

Judge

13-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

658

Police Station

ISLAMPUR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 137(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JITU ALLIAS GAURAV KUMAR

    Adv. YUGAL PRASAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the criminal petition filed by Jitu alias Gaurav Kumar against the State of Bihar, finding that the petitioner failed to establish grounds for interference under CrPC Sections 181 and 183. The court held that the petitioner's allegations lacked credibility and that the investigation was conducted properly without any illegality or procedural breach warranting judicial intervention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

  5. 23-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

  6. 19-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

  7. 09-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 02-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 135/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the criminal petition filed by Jitu alias Gaurav Kumar against the State of Bihar, finding that the petitioner failed to establish grounds for interference under CrPC Sections 181 and 183. The court held that the petitioner's allegations lacked credibility and that the investigation was conducted properly without any illegality or procedural breach warranting judicial intervention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case