DEVRAJ YADAV vs THE STATE OF BIHAR — 192/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),126(2),109,308(4),331(1),303(2),352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 04th April 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRSH010013882026

e-Filing Number

17-02-2026

Filing Number

1347/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

192/2026

Registration Date

17-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Saharsa

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

04-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

168

Police Station

SIMRI BAKHTIARPUR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),126(2),109,308(4),331(1),303(2),352,351(2),3(5)
Arms Act Section 27

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEVRAJ YADAV

    Adv. Munni Kumari

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Apr-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    Case Summary: Devraj Yadav v. State of Bihar (192/2026) The court rejected Devraj Yadav's anticipatory bail petition in connection with criminal charges including extortion, criminal intimidation, and illegal arms possession. The court found that custodial interrogation was necessary and that Yadav's role differed significantly from co-accused Vinit Kumar, who had already been granted bail, emphasizing that parity in bail treatment is not automatic law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 24-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

  7. 28-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  8. 18-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 192/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Devraj Yadav v. State of Bihar (192/2026) The court rejected Devraj Yadav's anticipatory bail petition in connection with criminal charges including extortion, criminal intimidation, and illegal arms possession. The court found that custodial interrogation was necessary and that Yadav's role differed significantly from co-accused Vinit Kumar, who had already been granted bail, emphasizing that parity in bail treatment is not automatic law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case