State thr. Wadnerbhairav Police Station vs Vijaypal Balram UTP Advocate - Pathan Anwar R — 42/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 363,366(A),376,. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th May 2026.

Spl.Case - Special Case (Sessions)

CNR: MHNS100007672024

Evidence

Next Hearing

08th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

377/2024

Filing Date

28-06-2024

Registration No

42/2024

Registration Date

28-06-2024

Court

District Court-1 ,Niphad

Judge

3-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE

FIR Details

FIR Number

107

Police Station

WADNER BHAIRAV POLICE STATION

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

INDIAN PENAL CODE Section 363,366(A),376,
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 Section 4,8,12,

Petitioner(s)

State thr. Wadnerbhairav Police Station

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Vijaypal Balram UTP Advocate - Pathan Anwar R

Hearing History

Judge: 3-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE

24-04-2026

Evidence

10-04-2026

Evidence

27-03-2026

Evidence

10-03-2026

Evidence

24-02-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

24-02-2026
Order on Exhibit

SUMMARY: The bail application of Vijaypal Balram in Crime No. 107/2024 (rape of a minor girl) has been rejected. The court found a strong prima-facie case against the accused, who lured the 16-year-old victim via social media with false promises of employment, then committed rape. The court dismissed the accused's arguments that it was a consensual love affair and marriage, noting the victim's minority status and inconsistency with her formal statements. No change in circumstances warranted reconsideration of the earlier bail rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The bail application of Vijaypal Balram in Crime No. 107/2024 (rape of a minor girl) has been rejected. The court found a strong prima-facie case against the accused, who lured the 16-year-old victim via social media with false promises of employment, then committed rape. The court dismissed the accused's arguments that it was a consensual love affair and marriage, noting the victim's minority status and inconsistency with her formal statements. No change in circumstances warranted reconsideration of the earlier bail rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District Court-1 ,Niphad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case