Sachin Mishra vs State of Bihar — 131/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),316(2),306,303(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRPA200003192026

Filing Number

297/2026

Filing Date

16-Jan-2026

Registration No

131/2026

Registration Date

16-Jan-2026

Court

DJ Div. Danapur

Judge

2-District and Addl. Sessions Judge- VII

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

179

Police Station

Neura

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),316(2),306,303(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sachin Mishra

    Adv. Advocate

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Copy of Order

    The Additional Sessions Judge VII, Danapur rejected Sachin Mishra's anticipatory bail petition in a case involving allegations of illegally collecting over 15 lacs from college students through online transfers without issuing receipts while serving as admission in-charge. The court found direct evidence of embezzlement with serious charges carrying up to 10 years imprisonment and noted investigation was still pending, making bail inappropriate at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge- VII

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge- VII

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District and Addl. Sessions Judge- VII

  6. 17-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 16-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 131/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Additional Sessions Judge VII, Danapur rejected Sachin Mishra's anticipatory bail petition in a case involving allegations of illegally collecting over 15 lacs from college students through online transfers without issuing receipts while serving as admission in-charge. The court found direct evidence of embezzlement with serious charges carrying up to 10 years imprisonment and noted investigation was still pending, 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