ADITYA RAO vs State Gov. — 883/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 74,78,296(A),352,351(3),3(5),75,196,308. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 20th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application.

CNR: UPGK010019682026

Filing Number

1832/2026

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

883/2026

Registration Date

26-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

3-ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)

Decision Date

20-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 24-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

Police Station

AIIMS

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 74,78,296(A),352,351(3),3(5),75,196,308

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1)DA,DHA,3(2)(XA),3(2)

Petitioner(s)

1.ADITYA RAO

Adv. NEERAJ KUMAR SHAHI

Respondent(s)

1.State Gov.

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
20-Mar-2026

OrderView PDF

Court Decision Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gorakhpur granted bail to Aditya Rav (19 years old) in bail petition no. 883/2026, charged under BNS sections 74, 78, 296(A), 352, 351(3), and SC/ST Act. The court found that while the accused faces charges of assaulting a woman doctor and making threats, the allegations lack corroborating eyewitness evidence, the accused has no criminal history, and charges carry a maximum 7-year sentence, warranting bail. The accused was released on personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
20-Mar-2026

Disposed

ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
17-Mar-2026

Hearing

ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
10-Mar-2026

Hearing

ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
26-Feb-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
26-Feb-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 883/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gorakhpur granted bail to Aditya Rav (19 years old) in bail petition no. 883/2026, charged under BNS sections 74, 78, 296(A), 352, 351(3), and SC/ST Act. The court found that while the accused faces charges of assaulting a woman doctor and making threats, the allegations lack corroborating eyewitness evidence, the accused has no criminal history, and charges carry a maximum 7-year sentence, warranting bail. The accused was released on personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.