ABHISHEK KUMAR ALIAS CHHOTU KUMAR vs THE STATE OF BIHAR Advocate - Sri Uday Narayan Sinha — 276/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),64,352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th March 2026.
REGULAR BAIL.
CNR: BRSP010012792026
Filing Number
1220/2026
Filing Date
09-Mar-2026
Registration No
276/2026
Registration Date
09-Mar-2026
Court
DJ Div. Sheikhpura
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 25-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
33
Police Station
MAHILA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ABHISHEK KUMAR ALIAS CHHOTU KUMAR
Adv. Sri Manoj Kumar 4
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF BIHAR Advocate - Sri Uday Narayan Sinha
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of Bail OrderView PDF
SUMMARY The court rejected the bail petition of Abhishek Kumar, accused of rape under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (punishable with life imprisonment). The court found direct allegations of rape supported by the informant's statement and case diary evidence, distinguishing the main accused from co-accused who received anticipatory bail on lesser charges of post-incident verbal abuse and threats. Given the serious nature of the rape allegation, the accused's presence at the crime scene, sufficient incriminating material, and ongoing investigation, the court declined to enlarge him on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District and Sessions Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 276/2026
SUMMARY The court rejected the bail petition of Abhishek Kumar, accused of rape under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (punishable with life imprisonment). The court found direct allegations of rape supported by the informant's statement and case diary evidence, distinguishing the main accused from co-accused who received anticipatory bail on lesser charges of post-incident verbal abuse and threats. Given the serious nature of the rape allegation, the accused's presence at the crime scene, sufficient incriminating material, and ongoing investigation, the court declined to enlarge him on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts