NOUMAN, MD NOUMAN ALAM vs STATE OF BIHAR — 65/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),85,76,352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRPU010002272026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

205/2026

Filing Date

08-01-2026

Registration No

65/2026

Registration Date

08-01-2026

Court

DJ Div. Purnea

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED

FIR Details

FIR Number

524

Police Station

AMOUR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),85,76,352,351(2),3(5)
Dowry Prohibition (D.P) Act Section 3,4

Petitioner(s)

NOUMAN, MD NOUMAN ALAM

Adv. MD NAZIR AHMAD

SALMAN, MD. SALMAN

GULASHAN, GULSSHAN

SAKIL, SAKIL ALAM

GAJIYA, GAJIYA PRAWEEN

Respondent(s)

STATE OF BIHAR

SAJRA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

07-03-2026

Disposed

02-03-2026

HEARING

23-02-2026

HEARING

21-02-2026

HEARING

11-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
Copy of Order

The court rejected anticipatory bail for petitioner Nouman (the husband) due to his negligent attitude and failure to protect his wife despite filing an undertaking, holding him solely responsible for her continued torture. However, the court granted anticipatory bail to the four other petitioners (brother-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, and sister-in-law) as there were no specific allegations against them and the charged offences carry maximum sentences not exceeding seven years. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected anticipatory bail for petitioner Nouman (the husband) due to his negligent attitude and failure to protect his wife despite filing an undertaking, holding him solely responsible for her continued torture. However, the court granted anticipatory bail to the four other petitioners (brother-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, and sister-in-law) as there were no specific allegations against them and the charged offences carry maximum sentences not exceeding seven years. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DJ Div. Purnea All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case