SANJEEV KUMAR vs STATE OF BIHAR — 245/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 69,127,1,115,2,351,2,352,3,5. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 25th May 2026.
Regular Bail
CNR: BRPU010020522026
Filing Number
1905/2026
Filing Date
28-Feb-2026
Registration No
245/2026
Registration Date
28-Feb-2026
Court
DJ Div. Purnea
Judge
3-1st Dasj
Decision Date
25-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 14-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
90
Police Station
SRINAGAR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SANJEEV KUMAR
Adv. VISHAL KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF BIHAR
-
2.BABLI KUMARI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-May-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
The Additional Sessions Judge rejected Sanjeev Kumar's bail petition in a case involving charges of sexual intercourse under deceitful means (sections 69, 127 BNS 2023). The court found that victim statements, case diary materials, and the charge-sheet supported the prosecution's allegation that the petitioner sexually exploited the victim under false promises of marriage, then refused to marry her. Considering the gravity of the offense, the court denied bail but permitted renewal after the victim's testimony in trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-May-2026
Disposed
1st Dasj
-
22-May-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
15-May-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
06-May-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
27-Apr-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
18-Apr-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
10-Apr-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
09-Apr-2026
Hearing
1st Dasj
-
08-Apr-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
01-Apr-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
02-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
28-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 245/2026
The Additional Sessions Judge rejected Sanjeev Kumar's bail petition in a case involving charges of sexual intercourse under deceitful means (sections 69, 127 BNS 2023). The court found that victim statements, case diary materials, and the charge-sheet supported the prosecution's allegation that the petitioner sexually exploited the victim under false promises of marriage, then refused to marry her. Considering the gravity of the offense, the court denied bail but permitted renewal after the victim's testimony in trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts