Himanshu vs State — 288/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 190,191(2)(3),194(2),125,115(2),352,351(3). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: UPET010006712026
Filing Number
584/2026
Filing Date
13-02-2026
Registration No
288/2026
Registration Date
16-02-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
9-Special Judge Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribe Act
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
472
Police Station
KOTWALI NAGAR
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Himanshu
Adv. Subhash Chandra Gupta
Nikhil
Trimohan
Respondent(s)
State
Hearing History
Judge: 9-Special Judge Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribe Act
Disposed
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 19-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 16-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 13-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 11-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Special Judge granted anticipatory bail to three accused (Himanshu, Nikhil, and Trimohan) in a violent group clash case involving illegal firearms and stone-pelting. The court found that no specific injury was attributed to the applicants, their allegations were general in nature similar to co-accused already granted bail, and they had no criminal history. The court balanced liberty rights against investigation needs, finding no immediate necessity for custodial interrogation given their cooperation undertaking and parity with co-accused, while imposing standard bail conditions including a ₹50,000 personal bond and cooperation with investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Special Judge granted anticipatory bail to three accused (Himanshu, Nikhil, and Trimohan) in a violent group clash case involving illegal firearms and stone-pelting. The court found that no specific injury was attributed to the applicants, their allegations were general in nature similar to co-accused already granted bail, and they had no criminal history. The court balanced liberty rights against investigation needs, finding no immediate necessity for custodial interrogation given their cooperation undertaking and parity with co-accused, while imposing standard bail conditions including a ₹50,000 personal bond and cooperation with investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts