State Government vs Vipin Singh Yadav — 779/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 420,409,406,467,468,471,. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 10th March 2026.

Bail Application

CNR: UPMT010016462026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1468/2026

Filing Date

20-02-2026

Registration No

779/2026

Registration Date

20-02-2026

Court

District and Session Judge, Mathura

Judge

4-Addl. District Judge Court No. 3

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

FIR Details

FIR Number

98

Police Station

FARAH

Year

2018

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 420,409,406,467,468,471,

Petitioner(s)

State Government

Respondent(s)

Vipin Singh Yadav

Hearing History

Judge: 4-Addl. District Judge Court No. 3

10-03-2026

Disposed

27-02-2026

Hearing

20-02-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
Copy of Order

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Mathura rejected the bail application of Vipin Singh Yadav in FIR No. 98/2018 under IPC sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, and 471. The accused was charged with defrauding the complainant and his wife of ₹11,00,000 by falsely selling two flats through a company without delivering the property or refunding the money. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of serious offenses including criminal breach of trust and forgery, noting the accused's criminal history of 46 similar cases, and determined bail was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Mathura rejected the bail application of Vipin Singh Yadav in FIR No. 98/2018 under IPC sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, and 471. The accused was charged with defrauding the complainant and his wife of ₹11,00,000 by falsely selling two flats through a company without delivering the property or refunding the money. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of serious offenses including criminal breach of trust and forgery, noting the accused's criminal history of 46 similar cases, and determined bail was not warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Judge, Mathura All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case