Dheeraj Kumar vs State of Bihar — 112/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109(1),352,3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 06th March 2026.

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRPA300002152026

Case disposed

Filing Number

363/2026

Filing Date

31-01-2026

Registration No

112/2026

Registration Date

31-01-2026

Court

Barh DJ Division

Judge

3-District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),109(1),352,3(5)
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Dheeraj Kumar

Adv. Anand Gaurav

Respondent(s)

State of Bihar

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

06-03-2026

Disposed

17-02-2026

HEARING

02-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
Order

Summary The District & Additional Sessions Court, Barh (Patna) rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Dheeraj Kumar (19 years old) in connection with Mokama P.S Case No. 483 of 2025, involving charges under IPC Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), and 352. The court found credible and specific allegations that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, abused and assaulted the informant Rohit Kumar with fist and lathi, causing injuries including a vital head injury (right parietal scalp), and considered the gravity and seriousness of the offense and nature of allegations to deny the anticipatory bail privilege. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The District & Additional Sessions Court, Barh (Patna) rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Dheeraj Kumar (19 years old) in connection with Mokama P.S Case No. 483 of 2025, involving charges under IPC Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), and 352. The court found credible and specific allegations that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, abused and assaulted the informant Rohit Kumar with fist and lathi, causing injuries including a vital head injury (right parietal scalp), and considered the gravity and seriousness of the offense and nature of allegations to deny the anticipatory bail privilege. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Barh DJ Division All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case