SHIV KUMAR vs State Gov. — 1011/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 69,115(2),352,351(3). Disposed: Contested--DECIDED/ DISPOSED on 31st March 2026.
Bail Application.
CNR: UPGK010023822026
Filing Number
2216/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
1011/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
45-Add. Dist. Judge/FTC-1 (Crime Against Women)
Decision Date
31st March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED/ DISPOSED
FIR Details
FIR Number
83
Police Station
Gagaha
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHIV KUMAR
Respondent(s)
State Gov.
Hearing History
Judge: 45-Add. Dist. Judge/FTC-1 (Crime Against Women)
Disposed
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 31-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 25-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 20-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 17-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court) in Gorakhpur rejected the bail petition filed by Shiv Kumar (accused), who faces charges under BNS Sections 69, 115(2), 352, and 351(3) for allegedly deceiving a widow with promises of marriage, committing sexual assault multiple times, physical abuse, threats, and forced confinement. The court found the charges to be of a serious nature, noting that the accused defrauded the victim without any genuine intention to marry her, and determined that bail was not warranted given the gravity and circumstances of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court) in Gorakhpur rejected the bail petition filed by Shiv Kumar (accused), who faces charges under BNS Sections 69, 115(2), 352, and 351(3) for allegedly deceiving a widow with promises of marriage, committing sexual assault multiple times, physical abuse, threats, and forced confinement. The court found the charges to be of a serious nature, noting that the accused defrauded the victim without any genuine intention to marry her, and determined that bail was not warranted given the gravity and circumstances of the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts