ANOOP YADAV vs State Gov. — 991/2026
Case under Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1)D,3(1)DH. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 28th April 2026.
Bail Application.
CNR: UPGK010023332026
Filing Number
2167/2026
Filing Date
10-Mar-2026
Registration No
991/2026
Registration Date
10-Mar-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
3-ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
Decision Date
28-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 07-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
109
Police Station
Uruwa
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ANOOP YADAV
Adv. ANAND KUMAR TRIPATHI
Respondent(s)
-
1.State Gov.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
28-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary The Additional District and Sessions Court (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur granted bail to accused Anup Yadav in bail petition no. 991/2026. The court found that while the accused was charged with assault and wrongful restraint (IPC Sections 323, 504, 506), the prosecution failed to present evidence of misuse of bail. Since the accused is already in judicial custody with no criminal history and the opposing party filed a counter-case (establishing it as a cross-case), the court approved bail with personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
28-Apr-2026
Disposed
ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
-
20-Apr-2026
Hearing
ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)
-
10-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
-
10-Apr-2026
Hearing
-
03-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
-
03-Apr-2026
Hearing
-
28-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
-
28-Mar-2026
Hearing
-
27-Mar-2026
Hearing
-
19-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
-
19-Mar-2026
Hearing
-
10-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
10-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 991/2026
Summary The Additional District and Sessions Court (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur granted bail to accused Anup Yadav in bail petition no. 991/2026. The court found that while the accused was charged with assault and wrongful restraint (IPC Sections 323, 504, 506), the prosecution failed to present evidence of misuse of bail. Since the accused is already in judicial custody with no criminal history and the opposing party filed a counter-case (establishing it as a cross-case), the court approved bail with personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of equal amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts