SANJAY DAGRU KALE vs State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY — 142/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 334(1),307. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 24th March 2026.

Regular Bail

CNR: BRSU010022682026

Case disposed

Filing Number

2198/2026

Filing Date

25-02-2026

Registration No

142/2026

Registration Date

25-02-2026

Court

DJ Div. Supaul

Judge

7-Principal District and Session Judge

Decision Date

24th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

FIR Details

FIR Number

25

Police Station

KISHANPUR

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 334(1),307

Petitioner(s)

SANJAY DAGRU KALE

Adv. SANJAY KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY

Hearing History

Judge: 7-Principal District and Session Judge

24-03-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

HEARING

12-03-2026

HEARING

28-02-2026

HEARING

26-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

24-03-2026
Copy of order

Case Summary: Sanjay Dagru Kale v. State of Bihar (BA-142/2026) The Sessions Judge rejected bail applications for three accused in a theft case involving jewelry stolen from multiple shops on 26-27 January 2026. The court found the allegations serious, noting that accused Mehadi Alam made a confessional statement leading to recovery of stolen items from co-accused Sanjay Dagru Kale's jewelry shop and another accused's house. While Kale and Md. Mumtaj had clean records, the court cited the gravity of the crimes (theft at three shops in one night), corroborating evidence, ongoing investigation, and risk of evidence tampering to deny bail to all three petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Sanjay Dagru Kale v. State of Bihar (BA-142/2026) The Sessions Judge rejected bail applications for three accused in a theft case involving jewelry stolen from multiple shops on 26-27 January 2026. The court found the allegations serious, noting that accused Mehadi Alam made a confessional statement leading to recovery of stolen items from co-accused Sanjay Dagru Kale's jewelry shop and another accused's house. While Kale and Md. Mumtaj had clean records, the court cited the gravity of the crimes (theft at three shops in one night), corroborating evidence, ongoing investigation, and risk of evidence tampering to deny bail to all three petitioners. 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. Supaul All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case