NITISH KUMAR vs State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY — 399/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115,117(2),352,3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 09th April 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BRSU010026852026
Filing Number
2597/2026
Filing Date
12-Mar-2026
Registration No
399/2026
Registration Date
12-Mar-2026
Court
DJ Div. Supaul
Judge
21-District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
Decision Date
09-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
Last updated 28-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
203
Police Station
BIRPUR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.NITISH KUMAR
Adv. BHANU KUMAR PATHAK
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Bihar Advocate - JAI NARAYAN PANDEY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Apr-2026
Copy of orderView PDF
Case 399/2026 Summary The District & Additional Sessions Judge, Supaul, rejected Nitish Kumar's anticipatory bail application in connection with PS Case No. 203/2025 involving a quarrel over money transactions. The court found that Kumar's name was disclosed by apprehended co-accused Dilkhush Kumar and Randhir Kumar, the investigation remained pending requiring custodial interrogation, and Kumar had a prior criminal antecedent under the Arms Act (Raghopur PS case 08/2022), warranting his detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Apr-2026
Disposed
District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
-
06-Apr-2026
Hearing
District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
-
04-Apr-2026
Hearing
District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
-
30-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
-
19-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Additional Sessions Judge - V
-
16-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District and Session Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 399/2026
Case 399/2026 Summary The District & Additional Sessions Judge, Supaul, rejected Nitish Kumar's anticipatory bail application in connection with PS Case No. 203/2025 involving a quarrel over money transactions. The court found that Kumar's name was disclosed by apprehended co-accused Dilkhush Kumar and Randhir Kumar, the investigation remained pending requiring custodial interrogation, and Kumar had a prior criminal antecedent under the Arms Act (Raghopur PS case 08/2022), warranting his detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts