Bholu Ailas Nikhil Kumar vs State of Bihar — 2382/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),308(3),303(2),352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 02nd April 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRPA200061712025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
6074/2025
Filing Date
10-10-2025
Registration No
2382/2025
Registration Date
10-10-2025
Court
DJ Div. Danapur
Judge
5-District and Addl. Sessions Judge- IV
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
335
Police Station
KHAGAUL
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bholu Ailas Nikhil Kumar
Adv. MD FIRAQUE ALI
Jitendra Kumar Singh
Harendra Singh
Pankaj Kumar
Respondent(s)
State of Bihar
Hearing History
Judge: 5-District and Addl. Sessions Judge- IV
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 26-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 17-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 07-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 23-02-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to all four petitioners (Bholu @ Nikhil Kumar, Jitendra Kumar Singh, Harendra Singh, and Pankaj Kumar) accused of extortion, criminal intimidation, and theft in a land dispute case. The court found that while a bona fide land dispute existed between parties, no incriminating evidence was discovered during investigation and the case lacked substantive material, warranting pre-arrest bail with Rs. 10,000 bonds and standard conditions including mandatory court appearances and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to all four petitioners (Bholu @ Nikhil Kumar, Jitendra Kumar Singh, Harendra Singh, and Pankaj Kumar) accused of extortion, criminal intimidation, and theft in a land dispute case. The court found that while a bona fide land dispute existed between parties, no incriminating evidence was discovered during investigation and the case lacked substantive material, warranting pre-arrest bail with Rs. 10,000 bonds and standard conditions including mandatory court appearances and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts