State Government vs BHOORA AADI — 664/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,140(1),61(2). Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPMT010014322026

Filing Number

1280/2026

Filing Date

13-Feb-2026

Registration No

664/2026

Registration Date

16-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge, Mathura

Judge

1-District & Session Judge

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

109

Police Station

NARHAULI Highway

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 85,140(1),61(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Government

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BHOORA AADI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary The Sessions Court, Mathura rejected the anticipatory bail application of three accused persons (Bhura, Surajbhan, and Smt. Sheila) charged under IPC Sections 85, 140(1), and 61(2) for alleged dowry harassment, criminal conspiracy, and abduction resulting in the death of a woman named Poonam. The court found the charges serious, noted that the missing victim remains untraced, and rejected the accused's claims of false implication due to lack of supporting evidence, thereby dismissing the anticipatory bail petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District & Session Judge

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  5. 16-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 13-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 664/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Sessions Court, Mathura rejected the anticipatory bail application of three accused persons (Bhura, Surajbhan, and Smt. Sheila) charged under IPC Sections 85, 140(1), and 61(2) for alleged dowry harassment, criminal conspiracy, and abduction resulting in the death of a woman named Poonam. The court found the charges serious, noted that the missing victim remains untraced, and rejected the accused's claims of false implication due to lack of supporting evidence, thereby dismissing the anticipatory bail petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case