Sarita Devi Yadav vs State of Uttar Pradesh Advocate - Dinesh Kumar Pandey — 254/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 406,419,420,. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 24th March 2026.

BAIL APPLICATION

CNR: UPSN010007682026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

691/2026

Filing Date

09-03-2026

Registration No

254/2026

Registration Date

09-03-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

6-ADJ/Spl. Judge POCSO-I Bhadohi

Decision Date

24th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

FIR Details

FIR Number

64

Police Station

KOTWALI GYANPUR

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 406,419,420,

Petitioner(s)

Sarita Devi Yadav

Adv. Ashok Kumar Mishra

Respondent(s)

State of Uttar Pradesh Advocate - Dinesh Kumar Pandey

Hearing History

Judge: 6-ADJ/Spl. Judge POCSO-I Bhadohi

24-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Hearing

17-03-2026

Hearing

09-03-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

24-03-2026
PDF of Bail Order

Court Decision Summary The Special Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) at Gyanpur, Bhadohi granted anticipatory bail to Sarita Devi Yadav in Criminal Case No. 64/2025 under IPC Sections 419, 420, and 406, involving allegations of submitting fake gold ornaments to obtain loans from Indian Bank. The court found that while the charges involve serious fraud in the gold loan scheme, the case is triable by Magistrate court with maximum punishment under 7 years, and sufficient grounds exist to release the accused on interim bail subject to conditions including personal bond of ₹50,000, attendance during trial, and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Special Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) at Gyanpur, Bhadohi granted anticipatory bail to Sarita Devi Yadav in Criminal Case No. 64/2025 under IPC Sections 419, 420, and 406, involving allegations of submitting fake gold ornaments to obtain loans from Indian Bank. The court found that while the charges involve serious fraud in the gold loan scheme, the case is triable by Magistrate court with maximum punishment under 7 years, and sufficient grounds exist to release the accused on interim bail subject to conditions including personal bond of ₹50,000, attendance during trial, and non-interference with witnesses. 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 All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case