Arjun Gautam vs State of U.P. — 609/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 115(2),110,117(2),352,351(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: UPJP010018212026
Filing Number
1524/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
609/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
2-Spl. Judge SC ST Act.
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
FIR Number
3
Police Station
MARIYAHUN
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Arjun Gautam
Adv. Prahlad Kumar Singh
Respondent(s)
State of U.P.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Spl. Judge SC ST Act.
Disposed
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary Court Decision: The Special Judge granted bail to Arjun Gautam in a criminal case involving charges under BNS sections 115(2), 110, 117(2), 352, 351(2), and 3(5) related to an alleged assault. The court found sufficient grounds for bail considering the nature of offense (maximum 7-year punishment), lack of criminal history, cooperation during investigation, and that the accused was already on interim bail. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the prosecution's objections, noting no criminal history was presented, no evidence of witness tampering, and the investigation was complete with the chargesheet filed. The court imposed standard bail conditions including cooperation with trial, non-interference with witnesses, and abstention from criminal activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Court Decision: The Special Judge granted bail to Arjun Gautam in a criminal case involving charges under BNS sections 115(2), 110, 117(2), 352, 351(2), and 3(5) related to an alleged assault. The court found sufficient grounds for bail considering the nature of offense (maximum 7-year punishment), lack of criminal history, cooperation during investigation, and that the accused was already on interim bail. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the prosecution's objections, noting no criminal history was presented, no evidence of witness tampering, and the investigation was complete with the chargesheet filed. The court imposed standard bail conditions including cooperation with trial, non-interference with witnesses, and abstention from criminal activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts