SURAJ KUMAR vs State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH — 146/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),190(1),352,3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 13th March 2026.

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRNL100002702026

Case disposed

Filing Number

265/2026

Filing Date

05-02-2026

Registration No

146/2026

Registration Date

05-02-2026

Court

DJ Div. Hilsa

Judge

13-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

FIR Details

FIR Number

1

Police Station

TELHARA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),190(1),352,3(5)

Petitioner(s)

SURAJ KUMAR

Adv. UDAY KUMAR SINHA

Respondent(s)

State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH

Hearing History

Judge: 13-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-III

13-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

HEARING

09-03-2026

HEARING

27-02-2026

HEARING

25-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Copy of Order

Summary of Case 146/2026 The court rejected Suraj Kumar's petition challenging a criminal case filed against him under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 103(1), 3(5), finding the FIR was properly registered and the allegations sufficiently substantiated. The court observed that while the petitioner claimed to be acting in self-defense regarding an alleged temporal bone fracture incident, medical evidence and witness accounts supported the prosecution's version. Consequently, the petition to quash the FIR was dismissed, and the case was directed to proceed through normal judicial channels. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 146/2026 The court rejected Suraj Kumar's petition challenging a criminal case filed against him under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 103(1), 3(5), finding the FIR was properly registered and the allegations sufficiently substantiated. The court observed that while the petitioner claimed to be acting in self-defense regarding an alleged temporal bone fracture incident, medical evidence and witness accounts supported the prosecution's version. Consequently, the petition to quash the FIR was dismissed, and the case was directed to proceed through normal judicial channels. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DJ Div. Hilsa All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case