Fahim urf Babu vs State of UP — 308/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 305A,331(3),317(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPRP010010282026

Filing Number

982/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

308/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

4-Adj II

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 22-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

41

Police Station

SHAHABAD

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 305A,331(3),317(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Fahim urf Babu

    Adv. Mohd Faraz

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of UP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Rampur granted bail to Fahim (alias Babu) in a theft case under BNS sections 305A, 331(3), and 317(2). The court found sufficient grounds for bail despite the prosecution's argument about the serious nature of the crime and the applicant's alleged criminal history, noting that the applicant was not named in the original FIR and no prior conviction was established. Bail was granted on condition of a personal bond of ₹50,000 with a surety of equal amount, requiring the applicant to appear in court and cooperate in trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Adj II

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Adj II

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Adj II

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 308/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Court, Rampur granted bail to Fahim (alias Babu) in a theft case under BNS sections 305A, 331(3), and 317(2). The court found sufficient grounds for bail despite the prosecution's argument about the serious nature of the crime and the applicant's alleged criminal history, noting that the applicant was not named in the original FIR and no prior conviction was established. Bail was granted on condition of a personal bond of ₹50,000 with a surety of equal amount, requiring the applicant to appear in court and cooperate in trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case