ABHISHEK S/O ARVIND SINGH vs UP State — 857/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1),126(2),115(2),304(2),351(3),317(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPMO010031042026

Filing Number

2822/2026

Filing Date

16-Mar-2026

Registration No

857/2026

Registration Date

16-Mar-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 10-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

51

Police Station

PAKVARA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1),126(2),115(2),304(2),351(3),317(2),3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ABHISHEK S/O ARVIND SINGH

    Adv. MAHESH KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UP State

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Abhishek S/O Arvind Singh v. UP State (857/2026) The court granted bail to accused Abhishek in a criminal case involving charges of criminal intimidation, dacoity, and attempt to murder, finding that he was not named in the FIR and no recovery was made from him except ₹1,500 with no independent witness. The court noted the complainant's FIR was delayed, bore no signatures of independent witnesses, and the prosecution presented no criminal history against the accused, warranting his release on bail of ₹75,000 with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 857/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Abhishek S/O Arvind Singh v. UP State (857/2026) The court granted bail to accused Abhishek in a criminal case involving charges of criminal intimidation, dacoity, and attempt to murder, finding that he was not named in the FIR and no recovery was made from him except ₹1,500 with no independent witness. The court noted the complainant's FIR was delayed, bore no signatures of independent witnesses, and the prosecution presented no criminal history against the accused, warranting his release on bail of ₹75,000 with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case