Uma Shankar Singh vs State of Bihar — 5056/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 147,149,188,341,323,324,307,353,332,333,506,34. Disposed: Contested--Bail Rejected on 24th March 2026.

A.b.p - Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRSR010162332025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

24-12-2025

Filing Number

14845/2025

Filing Date

24-12-2025

Registration No

5056/2025

Registration Date

24-12-2025

Court

DJ Div. Saran at Chapra

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

24th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Rejected

FIR Details

FIR Number

92

Police Station

PARSA

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 147,149,188,341,323,324,307,353,332,333,506,34

Petitioner(s)

Uma Shankar Singh

Adv. Jeewanandan Sharma

Pappu Kumar Ray

Adv. Jeewanandan Sharma

Respondent(s)

State of Bihar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District Judge

24-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

HEARING

17-02-2026

HEARING

05-02-2026

HEARING

04-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

24-03-2026
Copy of Bail Order

The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Uma Shankar Singh and Pappu Kumar Ray, who were accused of serious offences including disturbance of public order, assault on police personnel, and damage to government property during a public gathering in March 2024. The court denied bail primarily on grounds of parity, noting that similarly situated co-accused persons facing identical allegations had already been denied bail by both the High Court and Sessions Court, and the present petitioners' roles were comparable in nature and gravity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Uma Shankar Singh and Pappu Kumar Ray, who were accused of serious offences including disturbance of public order, assault on police personnel, and damage to government property during a public gathering in March 2024. The court denied bail primarily on grounds of parity, noting that similarly situated co-accused persons facing identical allegations had already been denied bail by both the High Court and Sessions Court, and the present petitioners' roles were comparable in nature and gravity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DJ Div. Saran at Chapra All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case