RAJAT SHAHNI vs State Gov. — 1010/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 69,352,351(3). Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 17th March 2026.
Bail Application.
CNR: UPGK010023842026
Filing Number
2217/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
1010/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
45-Add. Dist. Judge/FTC-1 (Crime Against Women)
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
FIR Details
FIR Number
56
Police Station
Gagaha
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJAT SHAHNI
Adv. PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY
Respondent(s)
State Gov.
Hearing History
Judge: 45-Add. Dist. Judge/FTC-1 (Crime Against Women)
Disposed
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court for Crimes Against Women), Gorakhpur, granted bail to the accused Rajat Sahni in criminal case No. 56/2026 under IPC Sections 69, 352, 351(3), finding that the victim's sworn statement contradicted the prosecution's allegations of forced sexual contact and blackmail. The court noted the victim was a literate, adult woman capable of understanding her interests, and that she explicitly denied being coerced, threatened, or having intimate photos/videos made, thereby finding insufficient grounds to deny bail given the lack of criminal history and contradictory evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court for Crimes Against Women), Gorakhpur, granted bail to the accused Rajat Sahni in criminal case No. 56/2026 under IPC Sections 69, 352, 351(3), finding that the victim's sworn statement contradicted the prosecution's allegations of forced sexual contact and blackmail. The court noted the victim was a literate, adult woman capable of understanding her interests, and that she explicitly denied being coerced, threatened, or having intimate photos/videos made, thereby finding insufficient grounds to deny bail given the lack of criminal history and contradictory evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts