MD. MUMTAJ vs State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY — 159/2026

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

Case disposed

Regular Bail

CNR: BRSU010023852026

Filing Number

2305/2026

Filing Date

28-Feb-2026

Registration No

159/2026

Registration Date

28-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Supaul

Judge

7-Principal District and Session Judge

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

25

Police Station

KISHANPUR

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 334(1),307

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MD. MUMTAJ

    Adv. DINESH PRASAD YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    Case Summary: BA-159/2026 (MD. MUMTAJ v. State of Bihar) The Sessions Judge rejected the bail application of MD. Mumtaj @ Biru, accused in a theft case involving multiple jewelry shop robberies committed on 26-27 January 2026. The court found the allegations serious, noting that stolen articles were recovered from co-accused Sanjay Dagru Kale's shop based on Mehadi Alam's confessional statement that corroborated the recovery, investigation was in preliminary stages, and there existed risk of evidence tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Session Judge

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Session Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Session Judge

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 28-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 159/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: BA-159/2026 (MD. MUMTAJ v. State of Bihar) The Sessions Judge rejected the bail application of MD. Mumtaj @ Biru, accused in a theft case involving multiple jewelry shop robberies committed on 26-27 January 2026. The court found the allegations serious, noting that stolen articles were recovered from co-accused Sanjay Dagru Kale's shop based on Mehadi Alam's confessional statement that corroborated the recovery, investigation was in preliminary stages, and there existed risk of evidence tampering. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case