KAPIL DEV NISHAD vs State Gov. — 859/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),352,351(3). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 04th April 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application.

CNR: UPGK010018452026

Filing Number

1711/2026

Filing Date

25-Feb-2026

Registration No

859/2026

Registration Date

25-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

3-

Decision Date

04-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

182

Police Station

Pipiganj

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),352,351(3)
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1)D,3(1)DH,3(2)(VA)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAPIL DEV NISHAD

    Adv. KUNNU PRASAD YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Gov.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Gorakhpur Additional District and Sessions Court granted bail to Kapil Dev Singh (accused of assault and SC/ST Act violations) on the grounds that the charges, while serious, lack sufficient evidence of misuse if he is released. The court noted the accused was already in interim custody, no criminal history was presented, and imposed bail conditions including a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties, requiring his regular court appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Apr-2026

    Disposed

  4. 28-Mar-2026

    Hearing

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    Hearing

  6. 19-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  7. 19-Mar-2026

    Hearing

  8. 11-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  9. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

  10. 25-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

  11. 25-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 25-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 859/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Gorakhpur Additional District and Sessions Court granted bail to Kapil Dev Singh (accused of assault and SC/ST Act violations) on the grounds that the charges, while serious, lack sufficient evidence of misuse if he is released. The court noted the accused was already in interim custody, no criminal history was presented, and imposed bail conditions including a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties, requiring his regular court appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case