TUNATUN KUMAR vs State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH — 207/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRNL100004792026

Filing Number

470/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

207/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Hilsa

Judge

2-District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 24-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),352,351(2),3(5)
Arms Act Section 25(1B),A,26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.TUNATUN KUMAR

    Adv. ABHAY KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar Advocate - RAJARAM SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the bail application of the accused, finding that he was accused of committing criminal offenses under IPC sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) and other provisions. The court held that the investigation was still ongoing and that the evidence, including a written confession, supported the charges against the accused, making bail inappropriate at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Order

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Call for C.D

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  6. 06-Mar-2026

    Call for C.D

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  7. 02-Mar-2026

    Call for C.D

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  9. 23-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I

  10. 20-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 207/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the bail application of the accused, finding that he was accused of committing criminal offenses under IPC sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) and other provisions. The court held that the investigation was still ongoing and that the evidence, including a written confession, supported the charges against the accused, making bail inappropriate at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case