Subham Kumar vs State of Bihar — 716/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),74,303(2),352,351(2),351(3),3(5). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED AS NON-MAINTAINABLE on 08th April 2026.
Anticipatory Bail - ABP
CNR: BRPA010033182026
Filing Number
2877/2026
Filing Date
17-Feb-2026
Registration No
716/2026
Registration Date
17-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Div. Patna Sadar
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
08-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED AS NON-MAINTAINABLE
Last updated 19-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
2018
Police Station
PHULWARI
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Subham Kumar
Adv. Suman Thakur
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Apr-2026
Copy of Order
The Sessions Judge dismissed Subham Kumar's anticipatory bail petition as not maintainable because the charge sheet ultimately framed charges only under Sections 115(2) and 352 of the BNS, both of which are bailable offences. The court found Kumar had no reasonable apprehension of arrest given the bailable nature of the finalized charges, though Kumar remained free to reapply if circumstances changed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
06-Apr-2026
Copy of Order
-
06-Apr-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
30-Mar-2026
Copy of Order
-
30-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
18-Mar-2026
Copy of Order
-
18-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
02-Mar-2026
Copy of Order
-
02-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
18-Feb-2026
Copy of Order
-
18-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 716/2026
The Sessions Judge dismissed Subham Kumar's anticipatory bail petition as not maintainable because the charge sheet ultimately framed charges only under Sections 115(2) and 352 of the BNS, both of which are bailable offences. The court found Kumar had no reasonable apprehension of arrest given the bailable nature of the finalized charges, though Kumar remained free to reapply if circumstances changed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts